Print 277 comment(s) - last by Jshakour.. on Jun 16 at 2:53 PM

The EU has decided Microsoft latest effort to separate its Windows products from Internet Explorer is not good enough, despite it being a step ahead of primary competitor Apple. The EU's enforcement branch, the EC will be pursuing new charges against Microsoft.  (Source:
Not good enough for us, says EU

Yesterday Microsoft announced that in Europe it would not be shipping Internet Explorer 8, its market-leading browser offering, with Windows 7, its new operating system which launches October 22.  Despite the fact that its primary competitor, Apple's OS X Snow Leopard will ship with a proprietary browser (Safari), Microsoft felt it necessary to unbundle the browser in hopes of avoiding another costly antitrust bout with the European Union.

Unfortunately, for Microsoft its best was not good enough.  The European Commission announced late Thursday that it would still be pursuing charges against Microsoft.  The EC sticks with its previous assertion that by tying Internet Explorer to Windows, since 1996, Microsoft is "stealing" a unique and unfair advantage.

The EC says it took note of Microsoft decision to not bundle IE 8 with Windows 7, but it felt that the decision did not give users enough "genuine consumer choice".  States an EC release, "At the level of both computer manufacturers and retail sales, the Commission's statement of objections (SO) suggested that consumers should be provided with a genuine choice of browsers. Given that over 95 percent of consumers acquire Windows pre-installed on a PC, it is particularly important to ensure consumer choice through the computer manufacturer channel."

The statement summarizes, "Rather than more choice, Microsoft seems to have chosen to provide less."

The EC wants to force Microsoft to bundle rival browsers -- Opera, Mozilla's Firefox, Google's Chrome or Apple's Safari -- with Windows as install options.  Microsoft has been unwilling to do this.  Its main OS competitor, Apple does not bundle competitive browser offerings.

Opera's lawyer, Thomas Vinje, cheered the decision, stating, "Microsoft must now give users real choice, and not only buyers of new computers, but also existing users. Microsoft should provide a ballot screen through which both existing users and buyers of new PCs can easily select and get a browser of their choice."

Opera Chief Technology Officer Håkon Wium Lie added in a statement, "We note with intereste that Microsoft now seems capable of separating IE from Windows. However, we do not believe that Microsoft’s move will restore competition for desktop browsers. Most users get their operating systems from the OEM channel and Microsoft will recommend that OEMs pre-install IE8. As such, users are unlikely to be given a genuine choice of browsers."

He continues, "We believe that the idea of a ‘ballot screen’ is better: when going online, users will be asked which browser(s) they prefer to use. The browser(s) of choice will the painlessly be installed and ready for use."

The lawyer, Mr. Vinje, has also suggested that Microsoft should be retroactively fined for using its Windows platform to inflate its IE lead over competitive browsers like Netscape in 1990s.  This proposal seems unlikely as the EC has not commented on potential fines (other than those for non-compliance).  However, it is not outside the realm of possibility -- the EC has fined Microsoft over $2B USD for past antitrust abuses.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By xDrift0rx on 6/12/2009 11:45:02 AM , Rating: 5
Do they ever give up? Come's like they have nothing better to do

If you ask me, i think the best option is to add the "main" browsers to their windows update service and put them in there as the "optional software" and let the user choose from there.

By Lakku on 6/12/2009 11:50:46 AM , Rating: 5
Of course they have nothing better to do, this is how they pay for nationalized health care... by suing companies with lots of money, preferably and almost always, US companies. I'm tired of Europe and the EU, this is gone on long enough. Intel deserved it, and MS did at first, but this is just BS now. Maybe everyone over there should think about working more than 30 or 35 hour work weeks and producing something useful like the rest of the world, except for Africa, who produces nothing either.

By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 11:56:51 AM , Rating: 4
They still haven't released the evidence behind their judgment against Intel but that's for another time.

This is just lining their pockets. I think Ballmer and Gates should take the EU guys out back in an alley and just beat the living daylights out of them. Go old school on their arse.

By Lerianis on 6/12/2009 8:50:06 PM , Rating: 1
I have to agree. This is just the EU trying to line their pockets with money from Microsoft.

By bkslopper on 6/13/2009 2:32:19 AM , Rating: 1
Yeah, this is rediculous. I wonder how much damage MS could do to the EU if they introduced an auto-update that shuts down the european copies of Windows. That would shut that whole ocntinent down. Stuff it, EU.

By RW on 6/13/09, Rating: -1
By Funksultan on 6/12/2009 11:58:07 AM , Rating: 5
We should revolt and start our own country where they won't have this kind of influence over us!! DAMN THEIR TYRANNY!

Oh... wait...

By 85 on 6/12/2009 12:56:31 PM , Rating: 5

to avoid sounding prejudice, I'd like to first say that I'm British and i think the EU board members should go and play in traffic. Wikipedia says, "ensuring the freedom of movement of people, goods, services and capital." It sounds to me like they are just trying to play robin hood. they way i see it, Microsoft played the game of life. they worked hard, they got lucky and it kills me to hear that some is just trying to leach off of them. This is just like every other ass hat who get rear ended by a nice car and suddenly has a sore neck.

shame on you EU! I weep for the future...

By fishbits on 6/12/2009 1:12:26 PM , Rating: 2
"It sounds to me like they are just trying to play robin hood."

Except that Robin Hood stole from an abusively confiscatory government. You're right, though. This is very shameful of the EU.

By RoC1909 on 6/12/2009 1:53:16 PM , Rating: 3

Absolutely!! It absolutely peeves me that there are LEECHES out their attempting to make money off of someone elses hard work! This moron lawyer (Thomas Vinje) is just jealous that he isn't as successful as Bill Gates is and is only trying to capitalize off of his inadequacies in inventing something as popular as Windows. As I mentioned previously, I wish Microsoft would just give the EU a HUGE "middle finger" and get the hell out of Europe.

By jadeskye on 6/13/2009 12:12:34 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. I'm also british and i just couldn't agree more.

The last boat-load of cash was a discrimination on it's own, this is just rubbing a load of unnessesery salt in the wound.

Also, if this is such a big deal, why doesn't apple get sued too? the EU could double it's income...

By Strunf on 6/14/2009 6:21:33 AM , Rating: 1
Why don't you British just put some engines on your damn island and move away from Europe, if it's to play the US underdog role at least do it completely not just half-way.

By stubeck on 6/12/2009 3:50:38 PM , Rating: 5
This is not how they pay for nationalized healthcare.

By Hare on 6/12/2009 7:11:14 PM , Rating: 2
You do realize that each member country of the EU has their own healthcare systems? Right?

By Hare on 6/13/2009 2:02:46 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, this reply was not meant to go here.

By segerstein on 6/14/2009 5:15:24 PM , Rating: 1
€bns are peanuts when talking about healthcare costs at EU27 level. EU budget (union budget) is capped at 1% EU27 GDP and 40% of it goes to support inefficient (French) farmers.

What this commission has been doing is simply outrageous - from mobile roaming charges, setting the pricing for our toll roads (I'm from .si), forbidding normal bulbs, seal products, along with imposing onerous (over)regulation like REACH...

By bodar on 6/12/2009 4:50:56 PM , Rating: 1
Exactly. This depression has hit everyone hard. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't find new companies to hit with the "EU special sales tax".

By MadAd on 6/12/2009 6:32:59 PM , Rating: 2
why not come over here to see for yourself instead of filling your post with crap you obviously know nothing about

30-35 hour week? LOLOL!!! whats that, part time?

and africa produces nothing?

man you have a lot to learn, and everones voted your post up too, suggest you need a lesson on global current affairs before spouting hearsay and stereotypical BS.

By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 6:43:07 PM , Rating: 3

Only 2003 but hey... gotta start somewhere.

I do disagree with the comment about Africa though.

By William Gaatjes on 6/12/2009 7:05:01 PM , Rating: 2
The EU has currently 27 member states and i do not know where your homemade webstie got this information on. 40 hours is very normal here.

And most of you forget where part of your oil comes from : Nigeria.

To all of you i suggest you start to get some education about what is really going on ,on this planet.

By Hare on 6/12/2009 7:18:39 PM , Rating: 3
I definately agree. When you think about it, what is the US producing? Debt? I'm a bit worried about these Dailytech comments. They show complete ignorance.

Luckily I know plenty of smart people in the US who actually know what is going on outside their own country and even understand that on any metrics the US is not miles ahead of other nations. It's actually quite the opposite nowadays (literacy, infant mortality rate, freedom of press, economy in general etc).

The empty kettle rattles the most. That's what's going on at Dailytech. The vocal and dumb minority give americans a bad rep as morons who don't know the world around the states.

By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 7:24:45 PM , Rating: 2
The EU has currently 27 member states and i do not know where your homemade webstie got this information on. 40 hours is very normal here. And most of you forget where part of your oil comes from : Nigeria. To all of you i suggest you start to get some education about what is really going on ,on this planet.

I am not sure why you think it is homemade. There is a link to the source below the graph.

Did you miss the part where it said average? That's not everyone. I personally work ~2400 hours/yr.

I am well aware of where our oil comes from. South Africa also has diamonds. Yes there are valuable items that come out of Africa but pirates also come out of Africa. It's a mixed basket.

I recommend you tone it down.

By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 7:26:33 PM , Rating: 2
I originally meant I disagree with the OP's comment that Africa produces nothing btw.

By crazyblackman on 6/12/2009 8:03:45 PM , Rating: 1
We love Microsoft. It is a company run by hard working, honest and decent people. They should do as they please.

We hate Africa. It is full of lazy black people. Yuck.

Let's move on.

By BZDTemp on 6/12/09, Rating: -1
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 9:19:48 PM , Rating: 2
Where are you getting these numbers?

Please share.

By BZDTemp on 6/13/2009 1:19:24 PM , Rating: 1

It is a wiki article giving number from three sources. The IMF, the World Bank and the CIA World Fact book.

By BZDTemp on 6/13/2009 1:39:51 PM , Rating: 1
Oh and the 37-2½ hours is just my daily life here in Denmark :-)

By segerstein on 6/14/2009 5:26:08 PM , Rating: 2
Interestingly the Nordic countries are also very well represented in the top of GDP lists. Fx. Denmark is 5 or 6 depending on the list while the US is 15th, 10th and 17th. In $ it's like Danes producing 20-40% more value that the people in the US. I'd say it proves working smart is better than working a lot but maybe someone has a better explanation?

There are two measures of GDP (per capita):

- one is nominal GDP -

- and the other is purchasing power parity GDP -

Nordic countries are doing well on nominal GDP, US less so. But because in the US one can get more bang per buck, the practical value of one $ in the US is higher than in EU. This is why at PPP US ranks higher.

By sleepeeg3 on 6/15/2009 8:54:26 AM , Rating: 1
Illegal immigrants are factored in all the US metrics. There go all of them (the metrics, unfortunately, not the illegal immigrants).

By ira176 on 6/15/2009 1:32:39 AM , Rating: 2
Don't forget the Nigerian Lottery!!!!

By BZDTemp on 6/12/2009 8:32:37 PM , Rating: 3
Open you eyes and get some facts then.

- The fines are not going towards health care. In fact no EU money goes to that as it is done by the individual countries. Also exactly how much health care do you think fine that amounts to something like $2 per capita (There are almost 500,000,000 people living in the EU).
- MS still deserves it. For example have you noticed how Microsoft have been bringing out IE8 with their Windows update like a week or two ago.
-DailyTech is stupid for mentioning Apple and Safari in this context. Apple are miles away from controlling the OS market so of course it is irellevant.
- Considering that for just the four first months of 2009 the US-trade balanced had the US import $16.5 billion more from the EU than exported to the EU either we do produce something useful or you guys are being stupid.

Oh. not only do we work like 35 hours a week we also get six weeks payed vacation and that is not even counting bank holidays, free health care and free education. It really bugs you does it not :-)

By deanx0r on 6/12/2009 10:59:03 PM , Rating: 5
Oh. not only do we work like 35 hours a week we also get six weeks payed vacation and that is not even counting bank holidays, free health care and free education. It really bugs you does it not

I would like to light some truth on that statement of yours.

With those given numbers, I would assume you are French.
The 39 hours week introduced by Mitterrand, then 35 hours week introduced under Chirac were meant to share working hours and thus reduce unemployment. Yet, how do you explain that France has one of the worse unemployment rate in the EU in the past fifteen years?

Vacation, free health, free education aren't exactly free either. Someone has to pay for that. On average, I think the French are taxed 15-30% on their income if I remember correctly, which seems to be the norm. However, each employee comes with a social contract paid by the employers, an amalgam of fees destined to fund public services such as healthcare, education... it's one of the highest one in Europe and amounts for about 40% of a worker's salary. They call it "cotisations sociales", but it's really an "impot", or tax.

There is no such a thing as free lunch. I am French myself, and I have seen how this socialistic system burdens our way of life. Give me a choice instead.

By BZDTemp on 6/13/2009 1:33:32 PM , Rating: 2
I'm Danish and the numbers about working hours are pretty similar for the most of northern Europe/Scandinavia.

We to have high taxes and in fact we have record high taxes. However once you compare with countries that have low taxes and include what people there must st aside to health insurance, paying for their children's education and so on the picture is a different one.

Comparing France and Denmark I think a big difference is that our work laws combined with the unemployment benefits make for a much more flexible professional life. I worked in France for a short period and it seemed very old fashioned compared to Denmark. Like people was almost afraid of their boss.

Not many people here plan to stay in the same job for more than a few years. Because of this and that employers can actually let people go only paying their salaries a few months at the most means it is less risky to expand a business.

By FITCamaro on 6/13/2009 3:46:42 AM , Rating: 5
- MS still deserves it. For example have you noticed how Microsoft have been bringing out IE8 with their Windows update like a week or two ago.

So Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to offer updates to its products through its own update process? How would you propose they have customers upgrade? Never mention it and make it a difficult to find download buried in their website? It was an optional update, not a required one. You were not forced to install it, you chose to if you installed it.

-DailyTech is stupid for mentioning Apple and Safari in this context. Apple are miles away from controlling the OS market so of course it is irellevant.

Ah so because they have no market share, they should get to play by different rules? Yeah that seems like fair and balanced competition.

Oh. not only do we work like 35 hours a week we also get six weeks payed vacation and that is not even counting bank holidays, free health care and free education.

No it makes me think that, if I was a business, there is no way in hell I'd have any employees in the EU. Why try to produce in countries where the government mandates how much vacation I am required to give? And yes there are some politicians here in the US that are trying to force companies to give paid vacation as well. And it will do nothing but cost jobs or raise prices.

By ira176 on 6/15/2009 1:36:58 AM , Rating: 2
How long do you have to wait to get a simple doctor's visit, or God forbid, a more pressing matter taken care of with your "free" health care?

By UzairH on 6/13/2009 7:13:22 AM , Rating: 4
Don't say that in front of the Danish workers - we have to pay minimum 38% income tax PLUS 25% VAT on everything - and the income tax goes all the way up to 68% pretty fast.

So, no, we do not get anything from litigation, our health care is provided by HORRENDOUS taxe rates.

But we cool with that since we are not ambitious people :)

By Targon on 6/13/2009 8:52:34 AM , Rating: 2
The problem is that they should punish those who are doing something wrong. You can NOT release an OS these days without including a web browser, since most consumers do not know how to download software without one.

So, if Windows didn't have IE, then how would your average consumer download Firefox, Opera, Safari, or anything else? In addition to this, since none of these other browsers are commercial software, and are available for free, it isn't as if Microsoft is hurting them. Is the EU going after Apple for including Safari and only Safari on Apple computers?

By Hare on 6/13/2009 9:13:17 AM , Rating: 2
You can NOT release an OS these days without including a web browser, since most consumers do not know how to download software without one.

They are requesting that MS provides a simple prompt where the user can select which browser he/she wants to use. It's not a bad idea actually. When taking a new computer to use the user would need to make one extra click and that's it.

The problem is that I really don't understand why bundling IE in the first place is such a problem (I understood the reasons back in IE5 days). The user can easily take another browser into use and if it's now IE, where do you draw the line? Malware protection, HD defragging, File browsing? In 20y the EU-version would include just the kernel...

By Kenenniah on 6/14/2009 6:28:02 AM , Rating: 2
A simple prompt? Maybe from a programming aspect, but who decides which browsers get included? What if I out of boredom I developed a browser, would it need to then be included? What if in the near future there were a few hundred browsers on the market? Every time a new browser came up, would MS have to do a new prouduction run of installation media to include it and pull all old dvds off the shelves? If it's not constantly updated for new browers, then wouldn't it just be as unfair to any new browser companies that come out after the production run?
To get past those possibilities, one could argue the "prompt" would just take you to a internet connected and updated program that would give you the list. In that case, not only would MS have to keep updating it, they'd have to provide the bandwidth, space on their servers, and of course developer time to make sure it stays up to date. All for the sake of marketing competitors' products for them.

By oab on 6/12/2009 11:57:26 AM , Rating: 5
I have a better idea.

Ship windows without any software on it. You start it up, and all you get is a desktop. No IE, no WMP, no Wordpad, no notepad, no free MS games, no calculator, etc. and make that the only copy that can be sold in the EU.

Then put on sale right beside it the "Microsoft Software Package" for $10 which includes all that software that windows no longer ships with (in retail stores) in addition to making it available to the PC manufacturers.

By Inkjammer on 6/12/2009 12:03:37 PM , Rating: 5
Call it "Windows 7: EU Edition" and include one wallpaper only that says "Due to the limitations imposed by Microsoft by the EU we may include, and only include, the OS.

In addition, the OS can't come with system tools, either. No defrag, because that would impede on the Diskeeper Corp. No backup/system restore software, either, because that could hurt any company that makes backup software. No Reg Edit, because that would hurt any company that makes a shareware registry editor. No...

By RoC1909 on 6/12/2009 1:54:52 PM , Rating: 2

I love your way of thinking!!

By mattclary on 6/12/2009 2:01:03 PM , Rating: 5
Call it "Windows 7: FU-EU Edition"

Fixed that for you!

By Inkjammer on 6/12/2009 2:15:49 PM , Rating: 5
No, Windows 7 FU-EU Edition is the Ultimate Edition. I was talking about Windows 7: EU Edition (replacing Professional).

The limited FU-ED Edition comes with a high performance electromagnet so when the EU judges that the mere existence of Windows 7 competes with basic installs of FreeBSD, you can use the electromagnet on your hard drive to completely "uninstall" the OS. Microsoft can't include an official Windows 7 uninstaller because that would compete with applications like Advanced Uninstaller Pro.

By BailoutBenny on 6/13/2009 12:30:23 PM , Rating: 5
Actually, they would have to provide a voucher for an electromagnet of your choosing since arbitrarily picking one electromagnet manufacturer, or providing a Microsoft produced one, hinders competition in the electromagnet market.

By karlostomy on 6/14/2009 7:11:30 AM , Rating: 2
you guys have nailed it.

EU take note.

By cornelius785 on 6/12/2009 2:14:20 PM , Rating: 5
So you mean the Everything Unistalled (EU) edition?

By Oregonian2 on 6/12/2009 4:36:20 PM , Rating: 5
I'm surprised they're allowed to include a Microsoft OS within the Windows product, afterall it's a monopoly. They should be required to include Linux, OSX, SunOS, and perhaps a few other OS's on a Windows install menu to give the customer choices!

By ccmfreak2 on 6/12/2009 12:10:33 PM , Rating: 5
I like this. But they should include the slogan to the software package of "All the stuff the EU says we can't include with Windows". With a slogan like this, the consumers in the EU might wake up and begin voicing their opinions - hopefully with their votes.

By Spivonious on 6/12/2009 12:10:42 PM , Rating: 5
Yeah but even the desktop is a window manager. What about the other choices out there like KDE, Gnome, etc?

The EU won't be happy until Windows consists of a kernel that you have to provide your own boot loader and shell for.

By TSS on 6/12/2009 1:03:36 PM , Rating: 5
why stop there? linux has (is) a kernel. i claim anticompetitiveness and demand microsoft lowers the price of it's software to match linux! this is completely unfair competition!

i do have to say even us europeans are starting to become anti-europian. there's alot more talk about ditching the EU then there used to be (yknow, back when it still worked).

i wish we could go back to the pre-euro situation. there was peace, every country largely minded their own business, and trade agreements where already on the table so the economy was just as good if not better (everything's much more expensive now).

By monomer on 6/12/2009 1:49:19 PM , Rating: 5
I've uncovered a leaked screenshot of the Windows 8 EU Edition:

By Joz on 6/12/2009 1:48:56 PM , Rating: 3
Naa, make the app-less E-Win 7 sell for EUR244.99, and then make the app-pack sell for ERU4.99

Or, just sell them both for 149.99

By BZDTemp on 6/12/09, Rating: 0
By Kenenniah on 6/14/2009 6:40:30 AM , Rating: 4
Yeah, because us pros never want to quickly edit any .ini, .reg, .cfg, etc. etc. etc. without having to install a third party text editor. Yep, us pros would never use a program like Notepad. I mean it just drives me nuts when I'm working on someone else's computer and I can just right-click one of those files and hit edit to make a simple change. I would so much rather have to waste my time downloading and installing something else or always have a disk with me that has an editor.

By ira176 on 6/15/2009 1:43:37 AM , Rating: 2
I can agree with that, if the EU can go for it. And while they're at it, keep the ultra stripped down version of windows the same price while selling the software package for $10. Microsoft can make an extra buck and the people still get a choice whether to buy the add on or not!

By monomer on 6/12/2009 12:07:28 PM , Rating: 5
Opera and Mozilla can send out CD's with their software on it, just like AOL back in the good 'ol 90's. Or alternatively, you can pick it up at the supermarket for $1 if for some reason you don't get inundated with their junk mail.

By Oregonian2 on 6/12/2009 4:40:29 PM , Rating: 2
Problem is that AOL expected revenue from some percentage of the junk they sent out (they once were my prime supplier of floppies before they went to CDs). There would be no such thing for Mozilla or the free version of Opera. The supermarket version would have to be fully funded by the net revenue from the CD sales (as well as pay for the debt overhead caused by the funding of the CD creation/distribution).

By ianweck on 6/12/2009 12:13:59 PM , Rating: 3
I don't think hosting your competitors' software for them is fair. People who actually want a choice of browser will know how to download and install what they want. The people who could care less will stick with whatever they get, and the people who don't know there's a choice probably shouldn't be installing much software. I mean really, by now what computer user doesn't know what a browser is, or that there are several to choose from? A small number I bet, not worth all of this interest from the EU. They must have digested the money they were able to squeeze from Microsoft in the earlier litigation, coming back to the trough for more...

By Chadder007 on 6/12/2009 2:19:23 PM , Rating: 3
If I were in charge of Microsoft, at this point I would go ahead and threaten to totally pull Windows from the market in EU.

By Hare on 6/12/2009 4:40:58 PM , Rating: 1
If I were in charge of Microsoft, at this point I would go ahead and threaten to totally pull Windows from the market in EU.

Now that's a viable option! Pull out of the largest economy in the world by GDP. I bet that would teach those commies a lesson and please the stock holders... Maybe it's just me but that doesn't sound very smart.

Ps. I think the EU has gone too far and should just let MS ship the OS as it is. The possibility for the user to actually select which browser to use when starting the machine for the first time would be even better, but not necessary. Btw, Apple did this back in the nineties (bundled IE, Netscape etc. and let the user decide). Nowadays Apple definately doesn't offer any choices (Safari, iTunes lock in etc).

By Spuke on 6/12/2009 6:18:07 PM , Rating: 3
ow that's a viable option! Pull out of the largest economy in the world by GDP
Maybe the largest GDP but is that where most of their sales are? Would pulling out of the EU be a significant loss for Microsoft? Nevermind the shareholders for a minute, hypothetical question.

By Hare on 6/12/2009 6:53:23 PM , Rating: 3
Would pulling out of the EU be a significant loss for Microsoft?

Gee, let me think... Yes, it would be a huge loss. I'm sure you can find the income distribution charts from their investor website. Even without any actual numbers it should be pretty friggin obvious that it would be a huge loss. Not to mention that it would also open up the doors to other operating systems that could - once reaching critical mass - actually drive the global MS sales down.

The whole idea of MS pulling out of the EU is so stupid that let's just not say it anymore. Thanks...

By William Gaatjes on 6/12/2009 7:07:11 PM , Rating: 2
Finally someone who thinks...

By ira176 on 6/15/2009 1:48:01 AM , Rating: 2
EU is so yesterday, China's up in comming for largest economy.

By Mr Perfect on 6/12/2009 6:55:03 PM , Rating: 4
Nah, just stop giving the government special pricing. Let them pay retail.

By rdeegvainl on 6/13/2009 5:46:08 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft, should it be forced to include a way to install other browsers, should include
Happy browser
Bitty Browser
3B room
Browse 3D
Space Time
Xb Browser
Avant Browser
Crazy Browser
Phaseout Web Browser
Kid Rocket
Slim Browser
Maxthon Browser
K Meleon
Internet Explorer

Put IE as the recommended for compatibility option at the top, and the rest in alphabetical order. Then watch them cry.

By rdeegvainl on 6/13/2009 5:50:08 PM , Rating: 2
I posted this from Opera 10 by the way. But if they want to be retarded about this, screw 'em

By eddieroolz on 6/12/2009 2:18:01 PM , Rating: 3
Seriously. WHAT THE F*CK EU!

These whoremongers should be deal with immediately. May I suggest a W87 MIRV warhead to be deployed?

By bodar on 6/12/2009 5:05:23 PM , Rating: 5
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."

By KeyserSozeRulz on 6/12/2009 6:07:42 PM , Rating: 2
The European Union is ridiculous. I wonder where the huge mountain of money from fines go to?

By Lerianis on 6/12/2009 8:52:39 PM , Rating: 2
Supposedly, to the member countries of the EU, but some countries in the EU were stating that they had yet to see ONE cent from the last judgment against Microsoft.

By Nobleman00 on 6/13/2009 1:34:00 AM , Rating: 2
It goes to wine, male whores, and astroglide for the panel of judges.

By eddieroolz on 6/13/2009 4:51:07 AM , Rating: 1
Couldn't have said it better, buddy.

By vxmqzz on 6/14/2009 8:34:42 PM , Rating: 2
crazy and greedy Europeans,

By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 11:44:21 AM , Rating: 5
I'm sorry but I find it impossible to call this lawsuit complete BS. Anyone who is too lazy or too stupid to find an alternative doesn't need to be operating a computer. Further, for those who can't figure out how to install a new browser, I believe their head might explode if they actually had to choose a browser.

This whole situation is BS. Apple gets away with it and M$ doesn't.

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Well...
By ClownPuncher on 6/12/2009 12:12:29 PM , Rating: 5
Pirks and the EU, largest troll teams up with the largest leech. Godzilla gives up, news at 11.

RE: Well...
By TomZ on 6/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Well...
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 3:15:29 PM , Rating: 5
The principle is the same. On both Apple and PC (Linux as well) you have one bundled browser and the only thing stopping a person from downloading another one is their laziness. If M$ was shutting out competition by not letting them dl another browser or forcing things to work only with IE I wouldn't really have a problem with this. However, in this case, there is 0 stopping anyone from switching. All the browsers are free. All it takes is 2 minutes of your time but instead of taking 2 minutes out of your day once you agree with fining M$ billions of dollars?

Yeah, how do you rationalize that.

Does no one use judgment anymore or is the law the law and it's always right?

Man I miss the old days.

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Well...
By TomZ on 6/12/2009 3:35:45 PM , Rating: 4
I don't think the EU should have the right to dictate OS design and implementation to Microsoft, especially considering the weak position they're in. I don't think that any reasonable person would argue that Microsoft succeesfully thwarting competition in the browser market. The usage trends completely are the opposite.

And no, I don't think it would be such a great idea to put that kind of selection into the OS. Because when will it end? Who gets to decide what is on that list? What about other kinds of software - do we have to be "fair to all" and make it that simple to download and install all other sorts of OS-like utilities?

The fact of the matter is that it is already simple to download and install whatever software you like. There's no problem that needs to be solved.

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Well...
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 6:27:07 PM , Rating: 4
So far there were only two cases of such intervention from EU - media player and web browser. Both are clearly the leverage MS tries to use to catapult themselves in the new market and get another monopoly in there too. Hence both cases are nothing to worry about. MS gets its slap on the wrist, coughs up some Euros and embraces fair competition. Big deal :)

Yeah. You know all those dollars M$ earns from bundling free software.

Heaven forbid we get a monopoly on something that is free and completely open to competition.


Give it a rest. There is no reason the EU should be dictating this crap. Got a couple of friends in Aussieland who can't get WMP on to their N version because of the EU so instead they run the US version of Vista/XP.

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Well...
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 8:01:16 PM , Rating: 5
And yet... the first time you boot up IE it asks you if you want to change your default search engine.


RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Well...
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 9:25:06 PM , Rating: 3
Sure... EU policing the world in search of fairness. Only one problem: they don't know jack about what they are doing.

Check the numbers. IE's marketshare is dwindling and why do you think that is?

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Well...
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 3:41:11 PM , Rating: 2
No I don't like that idea actually. I find it a waste of time and unfair to M$ to force them to host their competitors software.

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Well...
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 6:24:31 PM , Rating: 3
Links, hosting, windows update, etc etc. It doesn't matter. M$ is still doing the work for their competitors. Period.

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Well...
By Cache on 6/12/2009 4:25:26 PM , Rating: 3
Yes, but this would force MS to ensure that the user's browser experience does not reflect negatively on the OS. In simple terms, this means page after page of forced EULA freeing MS from any possible legal repercussion as well as digital signing to ensure that the user actually agrees to what they are installing.

Unnecessary? Certainly. It would be perfectly legal for them to do, of course, and that 2-minute savings of not downloading the OS yourself could cost you 20 minutes of server authentication that what you selected to do would be verified so that MS would be assured of legal safety. All to make the EU happy that a user--and MS--obtained exactly the services the customer selected of their own free will.

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Well...
By Cache on 6/12/2009 10:36:44 PM , Rating: 2
Then what is the big deal about MS including its own browser in with the OS? Those that want a different browser will simply download the browser of their choice--end of story.

All this nonsense about monopolies is irrelevant when the product being argued about is free. And given that Apple is allowed the same, identical monopoly on including its' free browser bundled with the OS, it raises ethical questions on the parties bringing this kind of lawsuit forward. Again--when referring to a free service anyone can, at any time, change to one of their choosing at will.

RE: Well...
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 11:14:58 PM , Rating: 3
Shhhh rational decisions aren't allowed in the EU or DT.

RE: Well...
By eddieroolz on 6/13/2009 4:54:29 AM , Rating: 2
I think it's Apple who's backing this move.

What's to lose for them, right? They have everything to gain while making it look like it's EU that's doing.

I swear to god, I will trash everything from the EU/Apple/Opera when I see it.

RE: Well...
By KeyserSozeRulz on 6/12/2009 6:06:29 PM , Rating: 3
It is not in the EU powers to tell a company how the product should be designed.

This is about antitrust and abuse of power. If they believe customers are prevented from having choices then they can act.

Nobody is being prevented from doing whatever the heck they want and using whatever browsers they like. This whole case is a huge pile of horse crap, that degenerated into this ridiculous argument. I'd like Windows to ship with the EU logo in the the wallpaper. Why not? Wouldn't it be nice?

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Well...
By Lerianis on 6/12/2009 8:57:29 PM , Rating: 2
Okay, then they should have links to the numerous Windows Explorer replacements as well, the Windows Media Center replacements, the Windows Media Player replacements, etc.

Need I keep going on idiot? I don't have a problem with something else being offered, I do have a problem with them telling Microsoft that they cannot include THEIR solution pre-installed because it supposedly 'harms' other internet browser manufacturers, which is a LIE to be blunt, considering that I use Firefox, Opera, Chrome, SpaceTime and one other on my system.
If I can go out and download those competitors to IE, anyone else can as well!
Now, if Microsoft was caught CRASHING those applications somehow, then the EU would have something to bitch about if it was being done on purpose.

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Well...
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 11:17:46 PM , Rating: 2
Were you born in the 1800's when Utopianism was tried? Cause that's what you are aiming for and that isn't goin to happen.

No browser will ever be equal. No fight will ever be fair. Get over it and yourself.

RE: Well...
By Kraenar on 6/12/2009 11:22:56 PM , Rating: 2

as soon as Apple does what you said, I say Microsoft should too!

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/2009 11:59:48 PM , Rating: 1
I'll agree with you as soon as Apple grabs the same market share as MS has now.

RE: Well...
By TomZ on 6/12/2009 3:31:49 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah, how do you rationalize that.
Wow, way to extrapolate. How did you get all that from my one-sentence remark?

Pirks is right; Microsoft has to follow different standards than Apple because Microsoft has a monopoly and Apple doesn't. That was my point and what I said. (And shame on you downraters - what sense does it make to downrate a statement of fact!)

Despite your extrapolation to the contrary, I think the EU is wrong about this. Bundling IE with Windows does give it a competitive advantage, but looking at the situation as a whole, there is plenty of competition, and the EU is wrong to intervene in terms of forcing Microsoft to ship IE-free versions and to presumably impose fines, which is obviously their next step.

RE: Well...
By crystal clear on 6/13/2009 7:38:59 AM , Rating: 2
A European Commission official said the EU watchdog will examine the conditions under which Microsoft will ship Windows 7 without browsers to manufacturers and suppliers, warning that the Commission will find out if there are any conditions attached.

* EU says never asked MSFT to ship OS without browsers

* EU will examine conditions of Windows 7 rollout

The author of this article is NOT quoting the real news-he has other motives.

RE: Well...
By SiliconAddict on 6/14/2009 4:40:28 AM , Rating: 2
" forcing things to work only with IE"

Ummm someone hasn't been paying attention for the past 10 years. Anything designed for and around IE generally does NOT like to work well in a standards compliant browser.

RE: Well...
By Helbore on 6/12/2009 12:48:56 PM , Rating: 5
So what next? Let's remove the whole GUI, because clearly that has destroyed any chance of comppetition. If Microsoft just went back to the good, old DOS days, then things would be so much better for the consumer.

Seriously, how much does Microsoft have to strip out of their OS, purely on the basis that they have a big market share? Its not like they're stopping competitors writing software for their OS.

I mean, the EU are spending time and money arguing over the inclusion of a product that only exists as free options anyway. Its not like Microsoft are giving away a browser, whilst all its competitors charge for theirs - trherefore undermining their ability to sell.

If that were the case, the EU's decision would be somewhat valid. Of course, we would all agree that forcing the consumer to pay extra money for products they could get for free is a good thing.

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: 0
RE: Well...
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 3:07:24 PM , Rating: 2
So you want to force M$ to make life easier for their competitors and host their competitors software because someone can't google "opera" and click download?

Pardon me while I fall on the floor laughing.

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/2009 3:17:32 PM , Rating: 1
you want to force M$ to make life easier for their competitors and host their competitors software
No, of course not. MS should not host competitor's software, they should only host LINKS to competitor's software, as well as give OEMs tools to pre-install any web browser they want, not just IE. This is called fair competition.

RE: Well...
By TomZ on 6/12/2009 4:01:40 PM , Rating: 4
I don't think that Microsoft should provide free marketing for other software companies either. What you are suggesting is really the equivalent of Microsoft placing ads in the OS for third-party products. Let's hope that Windows doesn't turn into adware like that.

If people want to find software to load, they should just use a search engine.

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/2009 7:17:03 PM , Rating: 2
Giving end user a list of links to click without any ads, just a text list that includes ONLY the browser names - this is NOT an adware no matter how you slice it. This is pure choice and fair competition without a slightest sign of ads/marketing.

RE: Well...
By Kraenar on 6/12/2009 11:27:37 PM , Rating: 2
you are so jaded.

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/13/2009 1:40:26 AM , Rating: 2
You are so out of arguments

RE: Well...
By JoshuaBuss on 6/14/2009 3:25:07 PM , Rating: 2
I'd like to hear how you propose the included links are chosen and by whom, pirks.

I'd also like to know why you feel that the browser is the only piece of software microsoft has to do this with. Windows ships with hundreds of applications that have free replacements. Notepad and mspaint come to mind.

RE: Well...
By crystal clear on 6/13/2009 8:38:16 AM , Rating: 2
Read it from the source-

As for retail sales, which amount to less than 5% of total sales, the Commission had suggested to Microsoft that consumers be provided with a choice of web browsers. Instead Microsoft has apparently decided to supply retail consumers with a version of Windows without a web browser at all. Rather than more choice, Microsoft seems to have chosen to provide less.

As for sales to computer manufacturers, Microsoft's proposal may potentially be more positive. It is noted that computer manufacturers would appear to be able to choose to install Internet Explorer – which Microsoft will supply free of charge - another browser or multiple browsers. Were the Commission to conclude that Microsoft’s behaviour has been abusive, it would have to consider whether this proposal would in itself be sufficient to create genuine consumer choice on the web browser market. The Commission would inter alia take into account the long standing nature of Microsoft's conduct. It would also have to consider whether this initial step of technical separation of IE from Windows could be negated by other actions by Microsoft.

RE: Well...
By KeyserSozeRulz on 6/12/2009 6:14:36 PM , Rating: 3
Links to competitors products ? Nonsense. This is not a newspaper or outdoor. This is an operational system. Now every obscure broswer will feel it should have a link too. Some will end up redirecting you to porn !

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: 0
RE: Well...
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 9:22:29 PM , Rating: 3
But then that's not fostering competition. You are not allowing the smaller guys a legitimate chance to break into the web browser space. *rolleyes*

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/2009 10:31:53 PM , Rating: 2
EU can't have perfect competition everywhere but they can improve current sad state of affairs, which is what they're doing.

RE: Well...
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 11:18:37 PM , Rating: 2
They are wrecking shit is what they are doing. You can spin a turd all day but in the end it's still a turd.

RE: Well...
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 6:31:06 PM , Rating: 3
No, of course not. MS should not host competitor's software, they should only host LINKS to competitor's software, as well as give OEMs tools to pre-install any web browser they want, not just IE. This is called fair competition.

Give OEM the tools to install any web browser? ROFL!

Pardon me... still laughing.

Ok, I've gathered myself. Dell can slipstream FF into Windows in under 5 minutes if they really cared to. How else do you think they get all that bloatware onto every system so fast? They "download" (whether it be from a disk given to them via manufacturer or actually download it) to a host computer, extract the entire windows install, repackage it and then install it on every computer they make. There is 0 preventing them from adding Opera or FF to an OEM system today. Nothing. The reason they haven't done it is because no consumer has asked for it because they don't give a flip.

This has nothing to do with fair competition and you know it.

RE: Well...
By Pirks on 6/12/2009 9:26:56 PM , Rating: 2
You didn't get it. By said tools I meant a standard Microsoft "download browser" app which is a part of Windows and produced by MS, and is included in every EU Windows copy. This app is then populated by whatever OEM selling computers. This way it'll look the same for every EU Windows user, unlike incoherent patchy OEM produced crap that Sonys of the world are stuffing their PCs with.

RE: Well...
By Helbore on 6/13/2009 4:01:43 PM , Rating: 3
So not only should the EU decide how Microsoft can sell their software, they also should tell the OEMS exactly how they're allowed to bundle software on their own products.

What ever happened to the free-frickin-market?

RE: Well...
By inighthawki on 6/14/2009 10:35:42 PM , Rating: 2
Even giving consumers links to competitors products is like a retailer giving a map of directions to every competitor near it, and thats pretty dumb. Nobody ADVERTISES or even MENTIONS competition in a market, the free market is basically designed around the idea that you make yourself better than the competition.

RE: Well...
By Helbore on 6/13/2009 1:10:17 PM , Rating: 3
And who decides which browsers Microsoft should provide a link to? That's not improving competition, its neatly carving up the market between the current biggies.

If I decide to write a web browser, can I force Microsoft to add a link to it on their OS desktop? I doubt it and if I could, how much rubbish would users have to wade through with the thousands of third-party links all over the OS.

Sorry, but that is NOT fair competition in the slightest. It doesn't matter if you say I am "pushing" something because the facts - and the small matter of practicality - don't stack up in your favour.

Oh and I do have to wonder why you feel you are being treated unfairly because you have to download and install a third-party app. I mean COME ON! Since the dawn of computers, you've ALWAYS had to install third-party software AFTER installing the OS. That's WHY it is THIRD-PARTY!

After all, you can install Opera as your default browser as soon as you have finished your Windows install. You can then choose to never use IE again. Yet apparently it is "unfair" because you can't make this choice in the setup screen? One really has to wonder about the thought process that goes on in some people's minds.

What do they lose?
By cboath on 6/12/2009 11:54:05 AM , Rating: 5
Let's see:

IE = Free
Firefox = Free
Opera = Free
Safari = Free
Chrome = Free

What's the complaint? Our free stuff doesn't get used as much as theirs?

Netscape, back in the day, used FREE as a method to get people to use their browser back when you had to buy Windows Plus to get IE. Microsoft saw the free tactic worked and started to offer theirs free at about the same time Netscape tried to charge for theirs.

The free model has won out. They're all free.

What exactly do these companies lose out on by not having their FREE products showcased in boxed copies of windows?

I started to use FF because of IE issues with a site i went to. I don't use the FF default page, i've set my own to my preference. If I wanted another one, it takes a whopping 10 seconds to type in Takes up to 5 minutes do download their browser and 2 more minutes to install it.

Anyone, ESPECIALLY the arrogant EU/EC, who wants to belabor the point has to do it equally. If you're going after Microsoft for the tactic, you have to go after Apple as well. If it's wrong for one guy, it's wrong for them all.

They're going after MS because they're a cash cow.

What would happen if MS told them off and pulled all product and support out of the EU?

RE: What do they lose?
By Inkjammer on 6/12/2009 11:58:28 AM , Rating: 2
D'oh, while you posted that I was writing essentially the same post. But yeah, I don't get it either.

RE: What do they lose?
By xDrift0rx on 6/12/2009 11:59:48 AM , Rating: 5
i agree 100% about the free deal

so why doesnt apple get sued for selling safari only? theyre the ones jacking $$$ from their customers for the 500$ back lit apple logo..

or maybe mozilla and google should just write their own OS so the EU has nothing to complain about.

RE: What do they lose?
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: 0
RE: What do they lose?
By ccmfreak2 on 6/12/2009 12:14:13 PM , Rating: 2
So, you could say the EU is profiling. Only monopolies are not allowed to bundle.

RE: What do they lose?
By TomZ on 6/12/09, Rating: 0
RE: What do they lose?
By Pirks on 6/12/09, Rating: 0
RE: What do they lose?
By Motley on 6/12/2009 3:36:42 PM , Rating: 2
That's not the law. There is a ton of other conditions as well, which is why that portion of the case against microsoft was dropped.

RE: What do they lose?
By TomZ on 6/12/2009 3:54:47 PM , Rating: 2
Don't be pedantic. Of course there are details that are considered, but generally speaking, tying is illegal.

In the United States, most states have laws against tying, which are enforced by state governments. In addition, the United States Department of Justice enforces federal laws against tying through its Antitrust Division.

RE: What do they lose?
By xmichaelx on 6/12/2009 4:07:35 PM , Rating: 2
If MS were truly a monopoly, there would be no Apple. Mono=1.

There are plenty of equivalent OSs.

RE: What do they lose?
By Pirks on 6/13/2009 1:49:47 AM , Rating: 2
Plenty as in 3.5% of the worldwide OS marketshare Apple owns with others being even less? Right, 95% of MS worldwide market share is not a monopoly. Whatever makes you feel better, buddy :)

RE: What do they lose?
By Kary on 6/12/2009 4:17:21 PM , Rating: 2
Because Apple is not a desktop OS monopoly like MS

So I can use Apples OSX on any desktop computer now instead of being restricted to running OSX ONLY on Apple made computers.

RE: What do they lose?
By Pirks on 6/12/2009 6:50:59 PM , Rating: 1
No, because Apple has no monopoly on desktop OS market

RE: What do they lose?
By INeedCache on 6/12/2009 4:18:17 PM , Rating: 2
But if you want a Mac or Mac OS, IT IS a closed system and the consumer HAS NO CHOICE. It's BS. Just like the EU.

RE: What do they lose?
By Pirks on 6/12/2009 7:00:47 PM , Rating: 2
No, consumer HAS choice. Choice between PC and Mac.

RE: What do they lose?
By aftlizard on 6/12/2009 12:02:33 PM , Rating: 2
Good points.

This is a slippery slope they are hitting on. Their reasoning could be extrapolated to so many platforms and browsers.

RE: What do they lose?
By Kary on 6/12/2009 4:28:29 PM , Rating: 3
Hmmm, I was wondering this, too:

1)Coke machines must carry sodas from other companies and vouch for how good the other sodas are or Cocacola gets sued.
2)Auto manufactures sued for including brakes in cars instead of allowing individuals to choose from 5 or so different brake manufacturers the first time they try to stop the car.
In this day and age a browser is ESSENTIAL to any OS...all OSes include browsers (even the free OSes), Netscape Navigator received lots of installs by way of ISPs DESPITE HOW BADLY IT SUCKED (I tried Netscape...I really just never liked it).

No company should be required to provide and support their COMPETITORS product. A monopoly is bad is NOT a business.

RE: What do they lose?
By ccmfreak2 on 6/12/2009 12:20:55 PM , Rating: 4
What would happen if MS told them off and pulled all product and support out of the EU?

This is a tough one, but one I'm sure Balmer has at least thought about. If they leave the EU, then that is a major market share that is going to go to competitors. The competition is already gaining support (slowly) - MS doesn't want to encourage it. Leaving would give the competition such a strong hold and support, that it will affect MS else where. So, even if they have to pay to be in the EU, it might be better than leaving just to keep the competition from gaining a surge of support.

There will come a time with the costs outweigh the benefits, and I'm sure MS is watching those numbers closely.

RE: What do they lose?
By Mitch101 on 6/12/2009 12:54:45 PM , Rating: 3
Actually Netscape bragged about their browser lead that they were so far ahead that Microsoft could never catch them. Being that a browser was the only product Netscape made Microsoft kind of said OK compete with FREE and began giving IE away. At that point why spend $40.00 on Netscape when you can get IE for free. The nail in the coffin for Netscape is when Microsoft bundled IE with the OS. Really it was evolutionary that this needed to happen.

That is history but with FREE browsers this really isn't a war in browsers its a war on data collection. Where do you go on the web and what do you search on then feeding you ads based upon your surfing habits.

My problem with bundling other browsers with Windows is Microsoft will almost have to support their browser because people will call in saying it came with my os purchase now what if the bundled browser puts the OS security at risk because of exploits that effect that paticular browser and there is no update? Again people will blame Microsoft for this.

If Microsoft loses and has to bundle other browsers then the other browsers need to include Bing as a quick search option in their products. If I download Chrome I want to have Bing as my default search engine and anyone downloading Chrome should be able to choose Bing as their search default.

Microsoft needs to stop taking it and start dishing it back out.

RE: What do they lose?
By djcameron on 6/12/2009 3:32:54 PM , Rating: 3
If I download Chrome I want to have Bing as my default search engine and anyone downloading Chrome should be able to choose Bing as their search default.

Have you noticed how Safari only uses Google for its search bar? When will someone force Apple to allow other search engines?

RE: What do they lose?
By Motley on 6/12/2009 3:39:00 PM , Rating: 2
Netscape was distributing their browser for free first. Microsoft only matched their price.

RE: What do they lose?
By TSS on 6/13/2009 10:26:45 AM , Rating: 3
Microsoft needs to stop taking it and start dishing it back out.

they tried that with WMP and it didn't do them any good.

their trying instant compliance now, see how that goes.

since the EU will still sue them it won't be long before even microsoft has had enough.

Now wait a minute...
By amanojaku on 6/12/2009 12:06:00 PM , Rating: 2
The statement summarizes, "Rather than more choice, Microsoft seems to have chosen to provide less."
Since when is that a bad thing? If MS provides every competing app in its packaging we'll end up with dozens of DVDs!!! That's going WAY too far.

RE: Now wait a minute...
By Lonyo on 6/12/2009 12:16:23 PM , Rating: 2
Indeed. If they wanted them to ship an OS sans media player, then surely instead they should expect MS to ship with a choice of media players.

The problem is that there are so many options, which ones do you pick? Sure, there are only 5 or so "main" browsers (IE, Safari, Chrome, FF, Opera), but if you extend it to everything else (EU already has a boner for media players so let's start there) then you have a wide variety, since you can go for audio and/or video players, so let's include MPC, MPlayer, GOMPlayer, iTunes, Winamp, Foobar etc etc etc.
Where does it end? Do you force them to include trial versions? Only free software? What about software that potentially has some malware in it (e.g. BSPlayer)?

RE: Now wait a minute...
By rickk1 on 6/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Now wait a minute...
By amanojaku on 6/12/2009 12:30:19 PM , Rating: 5
Sounds like trolling, to me. You just said "what was wrong with xp? why couldn't there be another service pack to fix whatever problems there may have been?" There's nothing wrong with Vista; I just don't see the need to use it if you have XP. Leopard has known vulnerabilities, too, so what the heck are you gaining by switching? A sexier laptop or desktop, maybe, with a larger price tag. I like MacOS, but I can break it just as easily as I can break Windows. And Linux, too, for that matter.

Windows 7 performance is quite amazing for a beta product. I'm interested in seeing how the GA version does, from a performance and security perspective. You seem to forget that ONE improvement in Windows XP and later is that it rarely, if ever, BSODs on its own. You need a crap-@$$ driver or faulty hardware for that, and that ain't Microsoft's fault.

RE: Now wait a minute...
By ccmfreak2 on 6/12/2009 12:39:54 PM , Rating: 5
What kinda crap is that??? What makes you believe "Microsoft must think money grows on trees"? None of this has anything to do with what MS THINKS. It has to do with the FACTS that MS has a majority of the market share.

If people don't want the new OS, they won't buy it. Yet, consumer's are buying.

Under your same logic, we should still be running windows 95. What is wrong with XP? Nothing, if you don't compare it to any of the new features of Vista and 7. But, since we are comparing, lets start with the wireless connection. Vista and Windows 7 have an AWESOME network management center. It makes it easy to diagnose if a connection problem is between your machine and the router, or the router and the web. Second, the file management is better, giving you more details about each file, depeding on the type (format and size for docs; artists, time, format for music; dimensions format and size for pics; ect). Third, you can look at the security measures taken with Vista and Windows 7. Sure, some people wine about the UA, but it is a great security feature that ensures that YOU are the one calling the application and not a bot. Fourth, you've got parental controls that allow parents to limit what their kids do and use - down to the very application rating, or name, or even time of day. The voice regonition navigation and typing is also rather cool, and works with Office. If you want more, just say so, I'll give you plenty more reasons why Vista is better than XP.

In the mean time, just go and curl up under your bridge and be part of the "Mac Experience." Maybe in the process of "experiencing" the mac, you might actually be able to get SOMETHING done - if it will let you. Remember, it took Jobs three years to give iPhone users copy and freakin' paste, so you better start offering for new features now and they MIGHT put it into Mac OS X: Polar Bear.

RE: Now wait a minute...
By ccmfreak2 on 6/12/2009 12:43:26 PM , Rating: 2
This is on top of the fact that most versions of XP out there are in 32 bit, which won't recognize all of the unofficial standard of 4GB of RAM that is coming out with new systems.

RE: Now wait a minute...
By Sazar on 6/12/2009 1:42:35 PM , Rating: 2
by ccmfreak2 on June 12, 2009 at 12:43 PM This is on top of the fact that most versions of XP out there are in 32 bit, which won't recognize all of the unofficial standard of 4GB of RAM that is coming out with new systems.

That has nothing to do with XP and everything to do with a 32-bit OS limitation. Get your PAE extension going and you're all set, if supported. Naturally you get possible application instability with the PAE switch enabled, but you get to address more memory :)

RE: Now wait a minute...
By ccmfreak2 on 6/12/2009 1:53:24 PM , Rating: 2
Sure, but then XP is no longer "rock solid". And no business wants an unstable OS. So, once again, you might as well upgrade to ensure stability and scalability.

RE: Now wait a minute...
By amanojaku on 6/12/2009 2:07:35 PM , Rating: 2
XP does NOT support more than 4GB of RAM, even though PAE is supported. That is Microsoft's design.

RE: Now wait a minute...
By Plazmid19 on 6/12/2009 4:00:47 PM , Rating: 2
It IS by design, but mainly because vendors were not putting much effort into developing proper 64bit drivers that recognized PAE methods. Because of the excessive amount of driver faults in PAE trials, MS made a conscious decision to limit memory to 3.2GB to avoid driver problems. There are some excellent articles on this in TechNet and on MS development blogs.

RE: Now wait a minute...
By TomZ on 6/12/2009 4:13:52 PM , Rating: 2
Darn, because we were all hoping for a repeat of EMS/XMS/QEMM and all that crap all over again. Talk about a way to make a computer unstable!

RE: Now wait a minute...
By omnicronx on 6/12/2009 12:51:17 PM , Rating: 3
So your argument is that 'MS must think money grows on trees', yet you are willing to fork over an extra X amount of money over and above the price of a Windows machine to buy an Apple computer. Spock would not be pleased with your illogical thought process ;)

RE: Now wait a minute...
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 3:02:03 PM , Rating: 3
You sir are an idiot. Plain and simple.

RE: Now wait a minute...
By eddieroolz on 6/13/2009 5:12:19 AM , Rating: 2
You know, sometimes I wonder: Does EU even read these popular reaction to their so-called "People's Policy"?

Because if this represents the masses all over the world, then EU's got some serious trouble on their hands.

Oh well, I guess they don't care. Just suck all the money out of giant American companies, line their pockets, and flee somewhere else.

Pull out of the EU
By Nobleman00 on 6/12/2009 12:50:59 PM , Rating: 2
Rather than waste any more resources, I feel MS should just stop selling Windows in the EU.

"Okay fine, we won't sell in the EU." "No, no, no, you made an example of us and prosecuted us with unreasonable demands, FU EU, we reserve the right to refuse service."

Problem solved. The backlash from the inevitable public uproar against the government will squash this once and for all. A bunch of countries must suddenly go switch to Mac or Linux? The chaos would be awesome.

Partners will back MSFT because a precedant needs to be set or they will go after every manufacturer next.

HP must include every type of mouse on the market, not just their own.

Dell must also sell HP computers on their website.

Microsoft must include itunes and make Zune software work with ipods.

Apple must sell Zunes and make the itunes store Zune compatable, and include WMP in OSX.

Ford must include a light bulb from every bulb manufacturer in their cars.

Tylenol, must also toss in Bayer, Advil, Motrin, and Aleve pills in their bottles to provide you a fair choice, and they must take your phone calls to provide support on how to use them.

MSFT isn't a monopoly, they are just the leading brand. There are other choices, but few people like the other choices. Force HP to include other OS' on their hardware, oh wait, they do, but they can't run Apple's OS...

Apple OS must run on Apple hardware... now that is a monopoly by definition.

RE: Pull out of the EU
By TomZ on 6/12/2009 1:07:39 PM , Rating: 5
Instead, Microsoft should just add the costs of the fine into the price of the products they sell into the EU. Let EU consumers pay this "EU tax" instead of Microsoft paying it out of their profits. Then the citizens of the EU would be motivated to do something about this type of unnecessary government intervention to try to solve a problem that doesn't really exist.

You can be damn sure that if Microsoft (or Intel) were European companies in the same situation, this would not be happening. This really is about the EU sending a signal to big US businesses that it wields a big d**k and they intend to use it.

RE: Pull out of the EU
By Nobleman00 on 6/12/2009 1:29:39 PM , Rating: 3
Plunging them into the dark ages and an abyss of interoperability without Microsoft systems is much better. Faster lesson learned, then they can charge more and get more leeway when they're begged to return to the EU. Oh, don't forget the consulting fees on how to get everything back up to speed again.

Go ahead, get everyone up to speed on Linux. Sure, do it on a Mac. What?? It's not as simple as the Mac commercials and geeks say it is? Woe is you.

MSFT brought computing to everyone, not just the elite. They had a big part in moving this industry forward and yet people jump at every chance to take a shot at them. I'm not saying they're always right, just that they're not satan, and they don't tend to lie to the consumer as much as another trendy computer maker that really is a monopoly.

RE: Pull out of the EU
By Pirks on 6/13/2009 12:09:08 AM , Rating: 1
It's not as simple as the Mac commercials and geeks say it is
For a winzealot it's not, for a normal user it's simple indeed. Run native OS X apps for pretty much everything and use Windows VM for legacy stuff while you're migrating to native OS X apps.

RE: Pull out of the EU
By SuperFly03 on 6/13/2009 12:40:52 AM , Rating: 2
Bend over Apple fanboi... Job's wants some more of your cash.

RE: Pull out of the EU
By Nobleman00 on 6/13/2009 2:18:57 AM , Rating: 2
For a winzealot it's not, for a normal user it's simple indeed. Run native OS X apps for pretty much everything and use Windows VM for legacy stuff while you're migrating to native OS X apps.

Spoken like a true MacTard and of course you won't understand why.

If Microsoft were to pull out of the EU completely, would a Mac infrastructure be able to take over everything within the next year?


There's why it has the lowest market share. Because the world is more than editing music, videos, images, websites for your cat, and playing with all the cool apps built into the mac OS because nothing else runs on it.

"Oooooh, I can run finder, and safari, and there's no backspace key and there's a glowing apple on the back, and for everything else people find wrong, I just say I run a Windows Virtual Machine in Boot Camp, Fusion, or the other stupid VM app and maybe they won't realize that when all is said and done and they need to actually function in the real world THEY'RE STILL RUNNING WINDOWS YOU FU****G DOLT." Mac hardware runs Mac OS. Then to complete it and make it interoperable with other stuff, it has to run its competitor's OS in a degraded state because the garbage mac OS has to run as the host OS to run another garbage app that then runs Windows. So you paid a premium to run Windows anyway, in a trendier case with a logo that says "mactard", but running the Windows OS you needed anyway, with much slower performance than if you had just bought a less expensive PC from the start which would have run Windows optimally since it was the ONE AND ONLY OS YOU NEEDED.

Why is Apple competing with Microsoft? They should be competing with HP, Dell, and every other PC maker out there saying their mac hardware is better because they use the same intel processors as everyone else, the same brand hard drives as everyone else, the same brand memory as everyone else, and all that is different is the case.


To me every OS sucks, but don't try feeding me some bull$h!t about how the mac OS is better based on some f@g commercials and bull$h1t fanboy catch phrases.

RE: Pull out of the EU
By eddieroolz on 6/13/2009 5:08:06 AM , Rating: 2
use Windows VM for legacy stuff

Are you mentally retarded? The whole topic here is to withdraw from the EU, so you won't be able to use the XP that's the biggest part of the Apple selling point anymore without the EU breathing down your neck.

But then, they say only computer illiterates get Macs, and it does make sense.

RE: Pull out of the EU
By Pirks on 6/13/09, Rating: 0
RE: Pull out of the EU
By SuperFly03 on 6/13/2009 2:52:53 AM , Rating: 3
Keep up your ego and epeen. It seems to be working well for you.

RE: Pull out of the EU
By eddieroolz on 6/13/2009 5:10:50 AM , Rating: 1
And your quality of post degrades, shaming the entire Apple community.

You are a very excellent representation of the Apple community, Pirks. Jealous, arrogant, and more annoying than Jehovah's Witnesses.

Sometimes I'd rather wish to hear these Witnesses talk than hear Mactards speak.

RE: Pull out of the EU
By crystal clear on 6/13/2009 10:01:40 PM , Rating: 2
Its rather unfortunate thats its not only the E.U. but other countries(Japan/S Korea etc) as well have picked the dirty habit of imposing fines on companies like Intel ,M.S. etc.

A new addition to the list of countries-

MOSCOW/AMSTERDAM, June 4 (Reuters) - Russia's state anti-monopoly service launched a probe of Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O) over cutbacks in supplies of the Windows XP operating system in Russia, it said on Thursday.

The agency said it thought Microsoft had violated antimonopoly legislation by cutting delivery of Windows XP to Russia both separately and pre-installed on personal computers, as well as in its pricing policy on the product.

"Analysis of the market for various operating systems shows that the transfer to the new Windows Vista operating system is occurring while demand for the previous operating system, Windows XP, continues," the service said.

"Demand for separately packaged and pre-installed verions of Windows XP is also confirmed by retailers and the number of orders from the government."

It said it would consider the case on July 24, 2009

Its become an addiction now for every country who wish to

to take their share of the earnings from M.S. & Intel.

Just on how many countries can you impose the E.U. tax type of taxation ?

Its not the buyers who are complaining in all cases in any country.

Imposing huge fines under some excuse is like the SWINE FLU thats spreading to all corners of the world.

This needs U.S. govt intervention to STOP this practice of imposing huge fines.

MS should just leave Europe
By smackababy on 6/12/2009 11:52:52 AM , Rating: 3
If the EU wants to act like this, I think MS should just walk away. Tell them to shove it and sell in other markets. When opinions of the EU drop (honestly can't see why they'd be high, but people let them do whatever they want) maybe they will see how stupid it is to try and sue every successful company that offers things better than the competition.

RE: MS should just leave Europe
By Lonyo on 6/12/2009 12:12:34 PM , Rating: 4
I live in the UK and I agree.
I almost hope that MS just says "OK, if you have issues with us, we just won't sell our products in your areas".

That's about the only way the EU will sit up and take notice. And I honestly hope that's what MS do, even though it would affect me. If the EU wants to hound them over every little thing, then they should just drop it all.

By StevoLincolnite on 6/12/2009 12:29:28 PM , Rating: 2
I agree.

I'm just waiting for the day after Microsoft has lost enough "Billions of dollars" and tells the EU where to shove it and no longer sells a product there, I bet the EU would come crawling back after that.

Eventually there might come a point where it's more profitable NOT to market there OS to the EU if every 12 months they get a Billion dollar fine, to me it's just insane!

Why don't the EU just write out a LONG list of rules that Microsoft has to abide by and be done with? Instead of making up excuses after excuses to fine them again and again?

Heck Microsoft if you are listening just sell Windows 7 Starter Edition without any extra tools! Just a nice clean basic shell. ;)

To me it's just a cash grab, the EU is doing it pretty tough over there during the financial crisis, probably incentive enough to get as much cash as they can out of the worlds largest companies. (I'm Australian, and we haven't had half the issues they have had financially.)

RE: MS should just leave Europe
By nixoofta on 6/12/2009 12:43:15 PM , Rating: 3
My first thoughts exactly. I feel for you guys "across the pond" but Microsoft should not only pull their product but actively seek out and sue anyone using it. Recoup some of what they've lost to these thieves.

By erikstarcher on 6/12/2009 5:17:41 PM , Rating: 4
But then the EU would fine them for being anti-competive (ie. not competing). They should offer a version with all of the goodies removed, and replace the icons with an e-mail link to the EU so people can complain.

What constitutes a monopoly...
By cscpianoman on 6/12/2009 12:27:15 PM , Rating: 4
From what I can tell the EU has a funky definition of a monopoly. Isn't IE's market share something like 65% now and dropping? Microsoft is no longer able to dominate/control the browser market because the competition has a great product. There is no limitation on when, where and how you install any other browser. IE is also free! Where's the detriment to the competition, which is also free? Free=Free!

RE: What constitutes a monopoly...
By TomZ on 6/12/09, Rating: 0
RE: What constitutes a monopoly...
By Nobleman00 on 6/12/2009 1:42:46 PM , Rating: 2
(economics) a market in which there are many buyers but only one seller; "a monopoly on silver"; "when you have a monopoly you can ask any price ...
exclusive control or possession of something; "They have no monopoly on intelligence"

Microsoft does not meet any definition, nor is this IE thing an unfair business practice as you can choose another browser to use.

RE: What constitutes a monopoly...
By TomZ on 6/12/2009 3:02:55 PM , Rating: 1
Well, the US DOJ prosecuted Microsoft under anti-trust laws circa 2000, and the EU continues to do so currently. So I'd say that government regulators don't follow the simple economic definition that you stated.

RE: What constitutes a monopoly...
By cscpianoman on 6/12/2009 2:01:45 PM , Rating: 2
That's the thing, they are not gaining marketshare, in fact, they are losing marketshare.

RE: What constitutes a monopoly...
By TomZ on 6/12/2009 3:03:47 PM , Rating: 2
That doesn't seem to matter to EU regulators, does it?

By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 3:11:10 PM , Rating: 2
No it doesn't.

EU people can't see past their own pockets

Spoiled child behavior
By scarborian on 6/12/09, Rating: 0
RE: Spoiled child behavior
By TomZ on 6/12/2009 1:00:49 PM , Rating: 3
No, actually, the EU is acting like the spoiled brat kid that can't stand that somebody else has a better toy than they do. So they whine and cry and eventually beat up the other kid and take the toy away from them.

RE: Spoiled child behavior
By Qi on 6/13/2009 1:21:38 PM , Rating: 2
This is the best analogy: A kid (Microsoft) wants to play with other kids (Member States of the EU) in their house (EU Internal Market), but despite being allowed into the house to play, the kid doesn't listen to the other kids' parents (European Commission). The parents tell the kid to behave, but instead of obeying, the kid starts to whine, cry and cheat. The kid doesn't leave the house though, because the other kids have all the cool toys.

If Microsoft wants to sell their product to half a billion Europeans, they have to play by the rules. It's our market, we decide what they have to do if they want to do business here. If they don't like it, they will be fined and they are always free to leave. They will never do that though, firstly because they can't (some Americans may like it, but being a multinational company the stockholders would go crazy) and secondly because it's their single largest market, and leaving that is an incredibly stupid decision.

RE: Spoiled child behavior
By tmouse on 6/15/2009 8:21:48 AM , Rating: 2
Actually the EU has NO choice in "allowing" MS into their market, Its required by agreements and treaties. Using your analogy, a more accurate picture is the parents see the child has money so they try to extort the money from him. Paints a different picture. There is NO anticompetitive issue in the browser area. ANYONE who wants one can get one free and easy, AND it IS happening. They have NO right to tell a company it HAS to host competitors' products. If someone buys the OS the accept IE but they can get another browser at anytime, MS can sell an IE free version to OEMs, they are then free to add IE or ANY other browser, NO ONE is hurt in the least. This is a cash grab from the EC plain and simple and its ramifications for other companies is enormous.

RE: Spoiled child behavior
By Krinosy on 6/12/2009 6:22:33 PM , Rating: 2
The last time the EC sued MS about media players, the solution was to sell an N version of the operating system without the media player. MS prepares the same solution for the case vs internet browsers, and suddenly the EC its not good enough this time? Sounds like the EU is being the spoiled child this time.

RE: Spoiled child behavior
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 7:19:41 PM , Rating: 2
The media player suit was total BS as well.

By DotNetGuru on 6/12/2009 1:21:03 PM , Rating: 2
Why is MS required to advertise,promote and distribute its competitors' products?!? This is unbelievable!!
I can't think of any other instance of this type of mandate requiring one company to screw itself and help its competition.(ideas?)
What's next? Will the EU decide that MS is putting the publishers of other card games out of business? Next time we click the solitare shortcut it will instead say: "Wouldn't you rather log out and grab a new pack of Hoyle Playing Cards (TM)?"
And as for the Opera lawyer guy...what a little bitch. "Mom! MS isn't playing fair!! They're not sharing their ROI and market-share with the rest of us."
I say MS should just remove IE from the european market...make it stop working on existing installs, etc... and watch the nations fall apart as everyone loses web-access since they'll never figure out how to install a new browser without a pre-existing browser to let them get to, lol.
(Sorry for any typos, I didn't proof-read)

RE: Unbelievable
By cboath on 6/12/2009 2:25:24 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, they've done that in the past....

Starting with 95OSR2 i think and continuing into 2000 or XP (think its finally gone with vista).

That being, the ONLINE SERVICES entry in the start menu. It's something I always deleted off first boot. But it had like 5-6 different ISPs in it. I don't recall if it was mandated by a lawsuit though.

But the main point is why whine over your market share of a FREE product. By definition it doesn't cost you money. And to address an earlier point, Netscape was not pay software in the beginning. It changed around version 3.0. That same time is when MS started to give away IE. Always bugged me that it was OK for netscape to give their's away to gain market share, but according to them it was evil for MS to do the same.

If you wanna enforce crap like this, do it to everyone. That means going after apple, too.

Some the EU should learn.

If you don't know enough to go to to get a copy of firefox (or whatever your browswer of choice) - you lack the knowledge to make an informed decision on which browser you should choose in the first place. The vast majority of those people will see the Microsoft version listed first in the tree of choices and figure Microsoft OS and Microsoft browser are the best combo.

But if you've spent a decent amount of time online, you'll know of the other browser and then can make an informed choice if you want to go another way. If i want to create the cboath browser, Microsoft should not be mandated to make it available to people on their disks or via their installed OS. If I cut a deal with, say, Dell to include it on their machines, good for me. But I EARNED that. No one has EARNED the right to force MS to do their work for them.

And seriously, what benefit is it to these companies to have free web browsers. I admit to liking firefox, but I haven't paid them a cent in other products and I don't use their default homepage. What's the motivation for them?

RE: Unbelievable
By SuperFly03 on 6/12/2009 3:20:26 PM , Rating: 2

Those who can make an informed decision about browsers have and those that can't don't care.

Run along EU. Your circle jerk party awaits.

RE: Unbelievable
By bodar on 6/12/2009 7:29:41 PM , Rating: 2
I believe browsers make money through search referrals (for example, the Google search box in Firefox). I haven't seen official confirmation on this, but it's in the millions of dollars per year, allegedly.

This is why they care about market share so much. That said, this whole "bundling browsers" stink is lame.

RE: Unbelievable
By widcard on 6/12/2009 2:32:22 PM , Rating: 2
The EU is a joke! How weak is this. They want to set on their arses and watch the rest of the world make it happen so they can turn around and sue the crap out of everyone to make up for their failures! sorry for the flaming post, but frost me sideways. Come on the EU needs to grow a pair and take off those high heels and lipstick.

Lawyer Logic
By tdawg on 6/12/2009 3:59:27 PM , Rating: 2
This is my favorite part of this article. From Opera's attorney:

He continues, "We believe that the idea of a ‘ballot screen’ is better: when going online, users will be asked which browser(s) they prefer to use. The browser(s) of choice will the painlessly be installed and ready for use."

So, how will people "go online" to fill out this ballot and start downloading a browser without a browser being installed on the machine to begin with? If I were the makers of Opera, I would fire this asshat after reading his thoughts and hire a new attorney that can come up with logical ideas.

I know this and other points have been covered by many of you here already, but I needed to voice this so the shear idiocy of his brilliant plan wouldn't keep gnawing at my brain.

RE: Lawyer Logic
By TomZ on 6/12/2009 4:05:15 PM , Rating: 2
It is a simple matter to have a program that is part of the OS that can go out to a web site, download a list of available browsers, present a choice, and download and install - all without being a browser itself. Such a program is very easy to write. I could create a rough version in less than an hour.

But the broader issue, in my opinion, is whether Microsoft should be forced to include free advertising for third-party products within the OS. I consider this to be "adware," and unless Microsoft is going to give away the OS for free, then it has no place.

RE: Lawyer Logic
By TomZ on 6/12/2009 4:06:36 PM , Rating: 2
And further, what Opera really is asking the EU for is free advertising in order to boost their market share. Plain and simple.

RE: Lawyer Logic
By SiliconAddict on 6/14/2009 4:47:01 AM , Rating: 2
The basic engine of IE will always ship with Windows since a number of components in Windows uses the render engine. So creating a form that points to an installer on the net would be relatively trivial. However the possibility of having a man in the middle attack for such an install would a interesting question. Then there are security updates as well. Is MS responsible if someone's personal info is compromised because an alternate browser was installed through a MS installer form?
*shrugs* as if MS has been liable up to now for crap security in IE so I guess it doesn't really matter all that much.

The real news
By crystal clear on 6/13/2009 7:13:08 AM , Rating: 3
The author of this article in his copy & paste job did not post the items below,for the explicit purpose of inciting a heated discussion on the subject, that why he gave it a title matching that intention/s.

Yes he did succeeded in do so - see the number of comments.

Report the fact as they are & NOT present it to incite a discussion.(you could get in serious trouble do so)

The real news-

Opera says Microsoft EU browser offer 'not enough'

A European Commission official said the EU watchdog will examine the conditions under which Microsoft will ship Windows 7 without browsers to manufacturers and suppliers, warning that the Commission will find out if there are any conditions attached.

"We never suggested that they have to sell Windows without Internet Explorer. We suggested that they might have to give the possibility to customers to chose between different browsers," the official said.

To summarize it-

* Opera says browser move would not restore competition

* Says Microsoft's dominant position would prevail

* EU says never asked MSFT to ship OS without browsers

* EU will examine conditions of Windows 7 rollout

Point to note-

EU will examine conditions of Windows 7 rollout

RE: The real news
By crystal clear on 6/13/2009 8:43:28 AM , Rating: 2
Heres the link-

Antitrust: Commission statement on Microsoft Internet Explorer announcement

RE: The real news
By crystal clear on 6/13/2009 9:04:55 AM , Rating: 2
Now lets read from the source (both sides) to get the exact story as it is-

Working to Fulfill our Legal Obligations in Europe for Windows 7

What does this mean for European consumers?

The E versions of Windows 7 will include all the features and functionality of Windows 7 in the rest of the world, other than browsing with Internet Explorer. Computer manufacturers will be able to add any browser they want to their Windows 7 machines, including Internet Explorer, so European consumers who purchase new PCs will be able to access the Internet without any problem. Consumers will also be able to add any Web browser to their PCs, to supplement or replace the browsers preinstalled by their computer manufacturer.

Our decision to only offer IE separately from Windows 7 in Europe cannot, of course, preclude the possibility of alternative approaches emerging through Commission processes. Other alternatives have been raised in the Commission proceedings, including possible inclusion in Windows 7 of alternative browsers or a “ballot screen” that would prompt users to choose from a specific set of Web browsers. Important details of these approaches would need to be worked out in coordination with the Commission, since they would have a significant impact on computer manufacturers and Web browser vendors, whose interests may differ. Given the complexity and competing interests, we don’t believe it would be best for us to adopt such an approach unilaterally.

Chicken and Egg?
By libuser on 6/12/2009 12:14:22 PM , Rating: 2
OK- I use Safari/OSX and FF on Redhat. But let's say I bought a PC without a browser preloaded. How would I go about getting a browser on the machine? I do not have a browser to use yet to got to the Opera site so I cannot download one that way. I know of a way to do it, but I will bet most users do not.

RE: Chicken and Egg?
By pianom4n on 6/12/2009 12:21:24 PM , Rating: 2
just wait until Opera makes an FTP client, and then complains to the EU that Windows shouldn't be allowed to come with its own FTP software

they won't be happy until Microsoft is ordered to include Opera with Windows

RE: Chicken and Egg?
By djcameron on 6/12/2009 3:44:25 PM , Rating: 1
Google, Opera, Apple, and Firefox can pay Microsoft (or the OEMs) to put the install <insert browser name here> shortcut on the desktop, or they can make CDs and sell them at the store, just like Microsoft must do to sell its OS.

By pianom4n on 6/12/2009 12:15:24 PM , Rating: 3
i wouldn't want microsoft of and OEM to install a browser for me. not that i don't trust them, i'm just so used to deleting every program OEMs install on my machine, it would be a bit weird for there to be something useful.

i don't even like how firefox on ubuntu comes with the ubuntu addon installed.

but if removing IE from windows doesn't make the EU happy, the EU has shown that they just want microsoft's money, and don't actually care about antitrust laws

By cscpianoman on 6/12/2009 12:29:41 PM , Rating: 2
wow, that's weird to see another pianoman...

Atlas Shrugged
By Screwballl on 6/12/2009 11:43:20 AM , Rating: 4
Atlas Shrugged here we come...

"punish the successful business model for the greater good of society"

By omnicronx on 6/12/2009 12:48:56 PM , Rating: 2
This is hilarious, if I were an EU citizen I would be outraged. Essentially their argument is the public is too stupid to know the difference and will buy the IE included version regardless.

Perhaps this is a sign that certain EU members have failed to notice.. PEOPLE DON'T CARE WHICH BROWSER THEY USE!!! As long as it gets them where they want to go they are happy. I think antitrust cases were suppose to protect the people, all I see here is the EU telling its people what they should and should not be doing.

If they force MS to not include IE, I have a feeling far more people will be miffed by the fact their brand new computer is not capable of browser the internet than the few that actually care about this, and of course these people won't be using I.E in the first place.

The EU does not control the world, devs and software developers are still going to make websites and webapps with I.E in mind, no EU rules and regulations is going to change this. IE will still remain the defacto browser, and people that currently use IE in the EU will most likely continue to do so.

Personally I use Firefox, and I have become quite comfortable with it, even though browsers like Chrome seem to be faster (i don't even really use plugins, so there is no reason I can't make the switch) but I have become accustomed to it, and it is very unlikely I will make the switch in the near future.

The same applies with this situation, there is no reason to believe that enforcing these rules will have an considerable effect on the market, the damage has been done, people are comfortable with IE and will most likely continue to use it.

RE: halarious
By Sazar on 6/12/2009 1:49:01 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft has previously offered it's N (or whatever they call the neutered version) previously and those versions barely sold.

So I put it to you that integrators and the public both DO care about what they use.

By LibertyTree on 6/12/2009 4:24:32 PM , Rating: 4
I think the solution M$ came up with was brilliant. It is truely free choice, econimical and I believe entirely legal. The problem with it is it makes the EU Beurocrats look stupid. Let me explain.

When Joe Hooligan gets home with his brand new computer and hooks it all up. What is he going to want to do. Go on the internet right? Well gosh there is no IE, FF, or other browser on the darn thing. So, now he is mad and calls shop where he bought the computer and starts yelling at them. What does the shop tell him? That the EU Screwed the pooch and browsers are no longer included with the OS.
Now Mr. Hooligan is mad at the EU.

Something I have noticed is that governments protect themselves first and foremost.

Ignorance does not equal monpoly
By rdawise on 6/12/2009 8:41:09 PM , Rating: 2
Opera's and the EU's beef here is not an Intel monopoly, it's consumer ignorance. The average user gets shipped IE and uses it because thats all he knows. Is it their fault other browsers don't get off their lazy butt and do advertising? Or for that matter, make Opera write their own OS and they can ship it with a "ballot screen" (won't happen).

The case is complete bull, no more no less. MS shouldn't pull out off the EU (wait, wasn't Ballmey threating to leave the US over taxes?) but should definitely ship a stripped down EU Windows 7. NO GUI or other tools. Simply DOS (they are allowed to use DOS still right?). That way EU can't complain.

Though I would love to see MS do this, it isn't feasible because no one would use EU Windows 7 if it were straight DOS.

By rdawise on 6/12/2009 8:43:26 PM , Rating: 2
I meant MS monopoly not Intel.

whats the next one
By raphd on 6/13/2009 10:46:29 AM , Rating: 2
Possible other pathetic reasons:

Windows Media Player
Accessibility options
System Restore
Disk Cleanup

Keep the list going...

RE: whats the next one
By FITCamaro on 6/13/2009 1:42:22 PM , Rating: 2
Ability to set and run scheduled tasks
Remote Desktop
Windows Calendar
Windows Mail
Windows Defender
Windows DVD Maker
Windows Movie Maker
Windows Photo Gallery

You know the stupid thing is that one of the biggest things Mac touts over Windows is how it comes with all this great software.

By BailoutBenny on 6/13/2009 12:34:20 PM , Rating: 2
I would prefer to see Microsoft and Intel pull out of the European market completely.

RE: Personally
By ianweck on 6/14/2009 4:53:55 PM , Rating: 2
Probably not a good idea to just cede the entire continent to Linux and AMD though.
Just saying...

European style investing
By ianweck on 6/12/2009 12:05:47 PM , Rating: 2
I guess this is how Europe plans to fund their governments in the future, by the time they squeeze more money out of Microsoft for this, they'll have burned through the billion+ they got from Intel....

RE: European style investing
By Aloonatic on 6/12/2009 12:11:09 PM , Rating: 1
I can't wait for the MS and Intel cheques to come through my door :-D

I'm gunna be rich, rich I tells yah!

Easy solution
By corduroygt on 6/12/2009 12:42:29 PM , Rating: 3
Close ALL offices in the EU, and don't pay the fines. Let's see how the commies like paying for their unemployment and health benefits. Just export Windows and be let's see the commie EU try to block it.

Pull Out, But.
By CU on 6/12/2009 1:03:38 PM , Rating: 2
I think MS should pull out then watch the EU fine the next inline, which of course would be Apple, since they would now be the most dominantly sold consumer OS. If apple caves in to EU demands then MS should also and step back into the EU market retaking the number 1 spot. Now if the EU didn't sue Apple then MS should raise all kinds of hell to who ever it needs, because that would prove they were just being singled out.

RE: Pull Out, But.
By Sazar on 6/12/2009 1:50:15 PM , Rating: 1
You obviously took macroeconomics in college.



This doesn't have to be a major issue.
By existentialisto on 6/12/2009 1:23:39 PM , Rating: 1
If anyone's actually interested in choice...