The web is currently ablaze with headlines that IE8 will not be included in the European release of Windows this fall. In fact, no browser at all is going to be included with the latest version of Microsoft’s operating system. No, Hell has not frozen over — the news is the result of Microsoft’s longstanding (and very costly) antitrust issues with the European Commission. And it has everyone, from the regulators to consumers to IE competitors, very upset. Fortunately, it seems like this is much ado about nothing.
The way some people are portraying it, it’s as if millions of computer users are suddenly going to be left Internet-less, isolated on their home PCs without any hope of ever reaching the web beyond. But an important statistic that some major news outlets are failing to highlight (though most others are pointing out) is that the vast majority of people won’t notice the change at all. That’s because PC makers — your Dells, HPs, etc. — will be able to install IE8 before their computers ever reach the consumer. And you can be sure that for nearly all of computers they sell, they’re going to do just that.
But what about that 5% of users that are buying the the OS in a retail store? For one, consider the fact that many of the people taking the initiative to actually go out and buy Windows 7 are perfectly capable of finding a way to install Firefox or IE on their computers. But what about everyone else? Microsoft has made it clear that it’s going to offer IE on an “easy-to-install basis“, which includes distribution via “via CD, FTP, and retail channels”.
In other words, every single computer store you walk into is going to have giant displays inviting you to grab your Internet Explorer pack. At checkout, your friendly clerk is going to remind you to make sure you grab one. If you find yourself walking out of the store without an IE CD, it’s almost certainly because you made the decision not to. In the incredible event that you do install the OS and can’t figure out where your browser went, there will likely be a hotline at Microsoft dedicated to answering this exact question. No, it’s not going to be especially user-friendly (at least compared to having the application pre-installed). But this is hardly going to be a crisis.
Now, it’s easy to decry Microsoft for this move, but it’s also pretty easy to understand why they’re doing it. The company is eager to launch Windows 7 on time, and it isn’t too keen to hand over another 1.7 billion euros in fines. It also doesn’t want to resort to the so-called “ballot screen which would present a list of alternative browsers during the OS’s first boot, which is one of the solutions being proposed. Microsoft may work out (or be forced to use) an alternative solution, but in the mean time this should help the company avoid any further fines. It’s also a way for Microsoft to effectively tell the European Commission to piss off.
Now wouldn’t for instance google be able to pay dell etc to pre-install chrome instead of IE?
Google already can pay for pre-installs of Chrome on PCs from OEMs like Dell or HP — and I’m guessing they are. Turns out though, that it’s really expensive and not particularly effective given the OEM’s reticence to make pay-for-placement browsers the system default.
So, why will these manufacturers (Dell, HP) choose IE8 and not a free alternative like firefox or opera? Will MS pay to have IE installed?
P.S. I wonder why the eu commission does not rule the same thing for apple safari
Yes, why is it ok For Dell, HP, etc to install IE8 after M$ got slapped for it?
They are vendors. Vendors can install whatever they like. Google will be pushing hard to get chrome on these machines, they have already made this much clear, Mozilla and other’s will be too.
Safari is bundled with a Mac, OS X retail versions are simply “Upgrades”. This is kind of a loophole but also valid because Apple is a vendor.
I don’t consider myself knowledgeable on the subject, but I completely disagree with this (”Safari is bundled with a Mac, OS X retail versions are simply “Upgrades”. This is kind of a loophole but also valid because Apple is a vendor.”).
The issue is, according to the EC, that Microsoft is abusing its monopoly powers by bundling IE with the OS. Apple, nor anyone else, has such a monopoly.
Quite happy to see MS stick it to the EU. Would be happier if MS just said ‘fine, we’re not selling Win7 in EU. period”. That would teach the socialist pigs not to tell the free market what to do.
“Would be happier if MS just said ‘fine, we’re not selling Win7 in EU. period”
-> That would indeed Europe a lot.
(Maybe some friction in the beginning, but after that, the EU would be 10 times better off without MS.)
Praise the lord! What a wonderful idea. Let Europe be free of crappy software!!!!!
“Would be happier if MS just said ‘fine, we’re not selling Win7 in EU. period”. That would teach the socialist pigs not to tell the free market what to do.”
I would sure love a good explanation why defending competition (and thus, ultimately, the free market) by not allowing a monopolist in OS software to take over other areas is socialism.
“Would be happier if MS just said ‘fine, we’re not selling Win7 in EU. period”. That would teach the socialist pigs not to tell the free market what to do.”
get a brain and/or a life dude … sure liberalism and big fat monopolies get along well. Don’t skip economics next time. PERIOD
I WISH they would not sell Win7 here!
But common man… that was a joke right? you can’t be THAT stupid?
“Google will be pushing hard to get chrome on these machines, they have already made this much clear, Mozilla and other’s will be too.”
Actually, Mozilla won’t be pushing hard to get on these machines. It’s just too expensive. It always has been. Had we gone that rout to get our 300 million users, it’d have cost us tens of billions of dollars (literally.)
Nothing’s changed here. Those machines that could be “bought” by a browser vendor before Microsoft’s announcement will still be available after this announcement. Those machines that couldn’t be bought aren’t going to be in any different position after Microsoft’s change.
No one knows what the contracts between OEMs like Dell and Microsoft actually look like.
Perhaps Microsoft is sending billions in co-marketing dollars to Dell. Perhaps Microsoft is charging Dell one price for Windows licenses that guarantee IE placement and a much higher price for Windows licenses that don’t guarantee IE placement.
Unless we actually know what those contracts look like, whether Microsoft ships Windows 7 on one CD (bundled with IE) or on two CDs (one with Windows and one with IE) doesn’t really mean anything.
So would a contract like that by MS would be a bad thing? because if they do this i think it’s appropiate, it’s the same as google paying HP to include Chrome.
So Microsoft threatening OEMs with increased prices for Windows licenses if the OEMs don’t toe Microsoft’s line on other Microsoft products is OK with you?
It wasn’t OK with the US Department of Justice who declared that behavior illegal and found Microsoft guilty of that very anti-competitive behavior.
Hopefully it won’t be OK with the EU.
everyone knows what those contracts look like because they’re uniform as ordered by the consent decress. eu = pathetic joke.
I hate to break it to you, but the Justice Department and EC review each of the contracts between Microsoft and OEMs. Microsoft can’t get away with exclusive contracts due to the consent decree.
Apple does not have the market share …
But I think, someday, IE8 will be included, specially in Europe.
How come Microsoft gets in trouble but Apple doesn’t?
Apple include Safari and lots of other build in software…
I mean built in, not build in…
Microsoft is considered a monopolist by the EU.. Apple isn’t..
That’s not the point – it was never possible to uninstall IE – on MS-machines you simply can’t get rid of it. And solely this is the punished distortion of competition in EU. You can’t get rid of Internet Explorer on windows – but you could always uninstall safari on a mac.
I suppose because of the larger market share MS has.
I suspect that is due to Monopoly laws. Microsoft owns all the houses – Apple just owns Boardwalk/Mayfair.
Because Microsoft including (and making impossible to remove without consequences) his browser is abusing his dominant position in the market, and this results in an unfair competition against other browser makers…
The same issue involves Windows media player if I remember well.
In my opinion if safari is not completely removable, Apple is in the same position, but maybe antitrust doesn’t agree with me (and they know the law) since Apple is not dominating the market
It’s because Apple is actually technically bundling it with the Mac, not the OS, and Apple is also a vendor.
There are different rules for companies that have overwhelming market dominance.
We call most of these rules “anti-trust” and they’re designed to ensure that a company with overwhelming share in one market doesn’t use that share to bully their way into another market.
That’s not exactly true… Its not different rules, its that monopoly companies are financially ABLE do things that are detrimental to . M$ offered IE for free, when Netscape was selling its browser- and hardly anything else. Netscape finally tried offering its browser for free, but they went out of business, not able to make enough profit. At the time, Intel had a similar dominance in CPUs, but they weren’t doing anticompetitive practices like M$ (and eventually AMD was able to compete)
M$ offered IE for free, when Netscape was selling its browser- and hardly anything else.
That’s not true. Netscape offered two versions of its products — a commercial version which it charged corporate-types to use, and a free version that was for personal use only. Netscape got itself into a jam by giving away a browser for free. It freed up Microsoft to offer a competing browser for free, and essentially destroyed an profit potential for the commercial version.
This is just like the Live Essentials being stripped out; the PC makers will probably install them for you.
Actually, if you do not have any browser as part of the OS, downloading a Browser without a browser is not easy. Users will have to transfer to their USB keys before starting the upgrade process.
But, yes, agree, it’s only 5%. Also, the other interesting point is that I think Google is going to use this opportunity to pay manufacturers for exclusive placement (IMO).
With internet access any Windows user should still be able to download IE via Windows Update right? Then what’s the problem?
you need a browser to setup most adsl routers
Steps:
1. launch Windows Explorer.
2. type “ftp://getIE.com”
3. save file
4. double click on file.
not working for me dude
You cant download anything without a browser, but I use a number of messenger clients, none of them are Microsoft, but every so often, an information box pops up inside a new message window inviting us to get IE8 customised by them, but I’m quite happy to ignore it and continue using Firefox.
ftp still comes bundled
How about government stop meddling in private business? If Microsoft wants to put some software on their OS, let them! If you don’t like it, don’t buy it.
Unfortunately, as long as governments believe most consumers are ignorant and uniformed, they will keep meddling.
Just like the Digital TV switch happening today, technological progress will always be held back back by a small percentage of non-tech consumers that the government feels they must protect.
Ah, but who to buy from in a market dominated by a monopolist?
this is not the 1980s dude. do u have no choice in OS or browsers? .. heard of apple or linux or firefox or safari? .. MS is far from a monopoly in this age. Having the largest marketshare dosesn’t make a company a monoply
mhhh MS has already been convicted twice for Monopolist behavior..
Nobody should ever tell the EC to piss off, because one day they finally free’ed the iPhone (and all other phones) in Europe (like already the case in many european states). Also the EC will probably rule on net neutrality, free speach and many other benefits that should be in act ever since (most of them are actually, but are absorbed by evil companies)
Here, I disagree with you. The iPhone only holds about 10% of the smartphone market. There’s no reason at this point for the EC to interfere in an exclusive contract between a minority player (Apple) and its European carrier. The government should only get involved when a player achieves true monopoly power. Apple isn’t even close at this point.
Fully agree. The EC is here to protect our rights… M$ after destroying Netscape completly stopped any innovation on the browser. Thank GOD for firefox, apple, opera for forcing M$ to try to catch up (they’re still not innovating but at least trying).
The idea is that once you dominate the market you just continue to milk it… Why spend money on innovation if what we have is selling is good enough?
Competition is good and required for our own sake.
How come neither Apple Mac with Safari nor Google Android with Chrome get into these kind of rules?
What about iTunes that is much a similar case with Windows Media Player?
Stunning of Microsoft anyways, absolutely brilliant!
Because Apple does not have a PC monopoly and Google does not have a cell phone monopoly.
The rules are different for companies that have monopolies.
It’s not a difficult concept. There are these things called laws and companies are not supposed to violate them.
clearly u have no concept .. having the largest market share doesn’t make a company a monopoly .. having no competition or choice does. U have no choice to buy apple or linux or use safari or firefox or chrome or opera instead?
having the largest market share doesn’t make a company a monopoly .. having no competition or choice does.
Where did he say that? NIce straw man. He was talking about monopolies, which require significant market share (for example, a good rule of thumb would be in excess of 80%), and which by their very nature imply limited competition/choice.
LL, I have the US Department of Justice and the EU’s European Commission both supporting my claim that Microsoft has monopoly power in the personal computer market. Who do you have supporting your claims?
Use of the word “Clearly” fail. lol
Give (some) people the intelligence to decide for themselves and they still end up following like sheep, which for market dominance is what companies like Microsoft are relying on. This brought about the EU’s anti-trust case.
Most people I know will use the software tools only long enough until they have downloaded and installed newer/better/alternative versions of programs they like using.
Having an alternative browser is best used as a backup. At least unlike iTunes which completely hijacked and messed up my music database (personally I prefer Windows Media Player, so for me that’s a moot point) and at least the browsers have the courtesy to ASK you to make them the default application for that class of computer usage.
If it’s shipped with No Browser… how do you log on to the web to download a new browser?
Don’t worry. Buy a Mac with Safari pre-installed, then you will be able to “log on to the web” and get your favourite (or new, as you put it) browser!
Don’t worry. Buy a Mac with Safari pre-installed, then you will be able to “log on to the web” and get your favourite (or new, as you put it) browser!
Ugh, fanboys. Or, for the same amount of money, buy two PCs loaded with Windows, and give one of them to charity.
Manufacturers are going to add the browser, just like they add piles of other software when you buy a computer. Imagine tech support lines crashing because people can’t get on the Internet because there was no browser. lol
All you need is a USB flash drive or a CD with the browser.
And what if you dont have those, lets says its a person with there first computer ?
wget
steps:
1. open Windows Explorer
2. type in the address “ftp://getbrowser.com”
3. save and install.
http://ftp... You’re definitely not old enough
this is Microsoft’s way of helping the struggling computer magazine industry …. they get to tape installation DVDs onto their covers and add value again
you blame MSFT for this? I wonder how people wants to do trash talk abt MSFT for everything
ROFL! No I don’t blame MSFT for this, I was trying to find a bright side for it
you blame MSFT for this? I wonder how people wants to do trash talk abt MSFT for everything
The madness of this situation is that of consumers are being negatively affected here – the very people the commision is designed to effect.
The net result will be not much different to what we have now, but for the 5% of people who purchase Windows 7 in a store, the “upgrade” will be much harder: You have to remove Vista first, rather than do an in-place upgrade – that could be a major hassle. Then you have to get a browser.
Interestingly, the major beneficiary to this will be Apple (their hardware, not browser). Their whole “simply works out of the box” message just got a lot more gravitas.
So what is the issue with EC? Why on earth would Microsoft ship its OS with five different web browser from competing commercial companies and then you pick? Anyone can download whatever browser they want in the aftermarket. Most of us probably have two or three of them installed anyweay.
I don´t get that when I buy an Apple. I don´t get free photo editing software when I buy Adobe Photoshop. I don´t get McAfee AV when I buy Symantec´s Norton 360!
This is going way too far. EC is becoming abusive of its powers. I hope more countries vote for parties like Pirate Party so we can start cleaning up this abusive power machine that was once a good idea for fair trade!
If they are going to nail Microsoft for something, then they better nail Apple too. Sure, fanboys will say Apple controls their entire product top to bottom and bundles almost their entire arsenal of software, but people don’t consider it a monopoly? Microsoft has already done enough to the point that it will start making the OS too stripped down of essentials. Heck, they won’t even be able to bundle in their free security software they will be launching soon. In short, EU needs to realize Microsoft’s “monopoly” days are over and go pick on someone else like Google.
Hmmm, I wonder if this means that the address bar in each window will no longer be able to serve as a way to immediately access a URL.
It’s unfortunate that the EU, like many competitors in the software industry, choose litigation as their way to bring money into their countries rather than invest in local companies that have the opportunity to innovate and compete and focus on bringing better products to market.
As the EU continues playing the role of Robin Hood, they only serve to undermine the achievements of their own companies by giving the impression that they can’t compete on their own merits.
You don’t believe in the rule of law?
That’s cool, I’m not one to tell others what they ought to believe in. But if so, you really should just come out and say that you don’t think laws should exist and anyone should be able to do whatever they want without consequences.
I’ll disagree with you but at least we’ll be having an honest conversation about the world as it exists and not some fantasyland.
thanks judge judy .. we get u hate MS and have a blind hatred
I don’t hate Microsoft at all. Wasting hate on a company is silly.
That you’d rather call names than debate the issue is enough for me to call it quits replying to you.
There are such things as stupid laws.
An extreme example was racial segregation laws. Obeying something just because it’s the law makes you a sheep. In a free country, you should be able to question when authorities make dumb laws.
This is just a dumb law. Forcing MS to offer competitors’ browsers is arrant idiocy. Who decides what browsers get onto the list?
Considering the fact that all browsers are free anyway, this is really much ado about nothing. The EC is just a bunch of clueless bureaucrats hungry for MS fine money just like US bureaucrats love making the tobacco industry pay fines.
“This is just a dumb law.”
Which law is dumb? Article 82 EC? Any anti-competitive leveraging laws? All competition law?
Calling something dumb that you probably haven’t even studied seems kind of dumb to me.
Come one there, everyone with a tiny experience of web development knows that MSFT has been holding the web back by their lack of innovation, and lack of implementing open standards etc… into IE. It’s not like if they were providing a good product (like Safari: fast & respect standards). The product is just so bad and most people end up using it just because it’s there… I guess what’s happening is called karma
I just hope that MSFT will now start to do some real improvement on IE.
if it wasn’t for EC you wouldn’t even have a way to install another browser, m$ would have closed all doors by now. stop spitting in your own plate.
You make it sound like this is actually going to happen. It won’t, and Microsoft already knows it (in reality, this is a PR stunt to draw attention to the absurdity of EU antitrust rules).
The fact is that changing a future product will do nothing to stop the massive fine, since it is based on past “infringement” dating back to 1996. Based on Microsoft’s FY 2008 revenue, the fine could be as high as $6 billion.
The other fact is that the EU appears to have already decided that Microsoft must carry competing browsers in Windows 7. Regardless of whether the company includes IE8, the ruling will require that it pre-install Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Opera, and give users a choice which one to use.
This announcement is just an expression of frustration over the inevitable…
You make it sound like this is actually going to happen. It won’t, and Microsoft already knows it (in reality, this is a PR stunt to draw attention to the absurdity of EU antitrust rules).
I agree that EU antitrust rules are absurd. But on what basis do you claim that “it won’t [actually happen]“?
The fact is that changing a future product will do nothing to stop the massive fine, since it is based on past “infringement” dating back to 1996. Based on Microsoft’s FY 2008 revenue, the fine could be as high as $6 billion.
Nonsense. MS has already been fined for past infringements.
The other fact is that the EU appears to have already decided that Microsoft must carry competing browsers in Windows 7. Regardless of whether the company includes IE8, the ruling will require that it pre-install Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Opera, and give users a choice which one to use.
Nah. First, neither the courts nor the EC has been able to force MS to carry competing products. That’s a pipe dream being smoked by MS’s competitors. The best that they’ve been able to accomplish is ordering MS to ship a version of Windows sans Media Player. MS anticipated that the EC was going to pull the same crap with Windows 7 and Internet Explorer, so they preempted the EC by deciding to ship a version of Windows 7 that doesn’t contain IE. It’s, quite frankly, brilliant. The EC can’t argue that MS is typing IE to Windows 7. That argument is dead. And ordering OEMs to ship competing browsers is essentially meddling in the business affairs of those individual OEMs — and that isn’t going to happen.
OMG this really pisses me off.
The largest growing export to the EU is fines from US companies like Intel and Microsoft. It seems like the Frenchies and Belgians commisars haven’t learned much since WWII. What a bunch of technologically challenged bureaucratic dushbags.
I would hope Microsoft stops selling Windows all together in Europe and ask these frog soup eaters officials to build their own OSs, idiots.
And for all TC Frenchies and Belgians commenting on my comment: nothing personal against you. Just stop voting for such retarded politicians.
You got my vote. But why stop in Europe, let them stop selling this crap everywhere. It would be good punishming for humanity! Or maybe we’ll all be much better
Microsoft succeeded making IE such a basic element of Windows, I guess a lot of buyers would choose to get IE pre-installed with their versions.
I think another big thing to come out of this is that M$ has to change its underlying architecture so that IE is not ‘tied’ to everything in Windows. This is a bonus for the end user (whether the OEM chooses to install IE or install another browser eg. Chrome or Firefox). Too often I have seen IE crash and the rest of the system crash with it.
Also means a smaller footprint in terms of installation.
seems quite silly to need to take the time to put IE on some other media when reinstalling windows, just a hassel
reinstalling? For intitial installation, Asa’s instructions are simple enough
1. launch Windows Explorer.
2. type “ftp://getIE.com”
3. save file
4. double click on file.
I guarantee M$ will make the above four steps completely automated upon REinstallation. The ruling prevents pre-installation of IE, but says nothing about providing it automatically on subsequent installations.
just in case, I went ahead and registered that domain… so now I can populate everyone’s computer who reads your post with malware.
I think Microsoft should just not sell windows to the EU anymore – they can afford it and the EU doesn’t deserve it.
Let them eat cake.
YES! YES! Let them punish the chinese and the indians as well. Those guys are stealing american jobs, right?
Hell, let M$ punish Humanity! Don’t sell Windows to anyone!
That would be great. It would open doors to innovation like you can’t imagine!
ahah +1
Plese put me and my country on the punish list!
This is ridiculous!
Will it be available through Windows Update after the initial installation of Windows?
have you ever tried to use a new windows installation to surf the web? in less than 10 seconds you’re just another bot serving someone else.
I’m sure lots of people do this… and that’s why the internet is what it is today…
Windoz should be forbidden on the internet.
Have you ever had that experience without installing you base WinXP and surfing straight to some warez and porn site and clicking on every download and popup offered?
Perhaps my experience is unusual but I’ve yet to suffer this viral armageddon that apparently is Windows.
Sure, I make sure I’ve got the latest Windows Updates and I run an anti virus app (NOD32 for preference) and my machine is beind a router that hides my a little bit … but by your reasoning I should be a drooling zombie.
As I understand it a lot of the infection vectors these days are via the browsers…. and IE is coming out on top of FF these days.
The folks spreading FUD about viruses and botnets would be better served educating their friends and family who do use Windows that there are some basic precautions folks need to take … and while Linux and OSX are less targetted at the moment if they ever get to the point where there is a return on the investment for creatig an attack that community will suddenly get a wake up call
I think Microsoft should still get fined anyway, they are just skiving off the issue and passing the bucket to the computer hardware builders.
A good article but a silly throw-away line at the end. How on earth does MSFT complying with the European Competition Commission’s ruling amount to “a way for Microsoft to effectively tell the European Commission to piss off”?
ECC tells MSFT not to bundle IE, so they don’t.
You can be sure of one thing, MSFT wants to bundle IE into Windows. They’re getting killed in the browser wars, which has a knock-on effect on share of search, hence advertising dollars.
So here we have concern over a browser not being on a new computer. Almost makes it sound like a browser is a requirement for a new pc. Maybe some company should integrate it into the operating system since it’s so needed. Wait, that’s what got us in this situation in the first place.
This whole problem is caused by Opera being such a bad company they turn to the courts instead of trying to behave like a real business. They only want to get a handout from Microsoft and not try and do anything like create a product people want and that they’re willing to pay for, and maybe actually try some real marketing for a change.
FF, Chrome and Opera fans will rejoice. But the truth is that most of the PC makers (like Dell, HP) will install IE8 before it actually reaches the end user.
Anyways, a small amount of IE market share will go down.
I am not usually in the Microsoft camp, but I would have to side with them on this issue. The EU antitrust suits are silly and getting a bit long in the tooth. Most folks don’t care about what browser they are using as long as they have one.
OEMs will place some kind of browser on their images even if IE8 is not it. I can’t see any sense behind selling a computer without any browser.
Maybe the OEM’s can just provide a step in the welcome wizard which allows the user to choose and download which ever browser they want?
Interesting move- But if you think about it, not a first for Microsoft.
Isn’t this exactly what happened with the Microsoft Java VM? Lawsuits were flung their their way for including a product in the Windows distribution, so instead of paying fines, they just dropped the product. Of course, the Java VM was ended as a product entirely, whereas IE8 is just losing “bundled with” status- Also, the context of the Java VM scenario was a little different. However, the process is the same.
1) Microsoft Bundles product with windows.
2) Because it’s the bundled default, lots of people use it, unaware of options provided by competitors.
3) Someone sues them for it.
4) Microsoft flips suing party the bird by “making amends” and removing the product, citing legal compliance to all the confused/annoyed users and effectively redirecting their frustration at the suing party.
I think this whole antitrust case is nonsense for so many reasons.
– You can’t force a company distribute competitors’ software for free.
– By distributing competing browsers, Microsoft would be *significantly* increasing the attack surface for malicious software. Microsoft cannot be forced to intentionally reduce the security of their software.
– If presented with a “ballot screen”, most uninformed consumers would just randomly pick a web browser from the list. This decreases security as well as “fair competition”.
– Any browser company could sue Microsoft for unfairly excluding them from the “ballot screen”.
– This would imply that at some point Apple, Symbian, and Blackberry could all be forced to exclude browsers (and media players, calculators, and other apps) from their OS’s as well. (Which is of course nonsense.)
– There is a difference between “enabling market competition” and “forcing market diversity”. This latest regulatory move is clearly an effort towards the latter.
– An OS without a browser is a competitive disadvantage for the OS. This would adversely and artificially affect OS market share, and could theoreticaly encourage consumers to buy a differnt OS that already includes a built-in browser of their liking.
Personally, I would be happy if all the regulators involved in this case would be sacked immediately. And Microsoft should be able to counter-sue for intentional discrimination, badgering, defamation, and not to mention the high cost of dealing with this ongoing regulatory @#$!.
First off a monopoly isn’t always a bad thing. Without a monopoly (whether it was MS, or Apple, Commodore, or whoever) the PC never would have taken off. Its much like the linux situation today. There are few standards between distros thus most companies ignore linux for programs.
Second, MS is losing market share in their main core competency, the desktop (they are holding steady or growing in their other 2 – office and server, respectively). They are rapidly dropping market share for IE. Obviously people are seeing they [MS] aren’t a monopoly anymore and that they have a choice.
Third (and last), if MS is forced to unbundle IE from windows then Apple should be forced to unbundle itunes from the ipod ecosystem. Apple is using the ipods market share to force users to use itunes at the expense of WMP or any other media management software. And for the record apple has a monopoly on the PMP with a 70-80% market share (the latest numbers I can find show 70% in 2007. with the introduction of the iphone that number has surely climbed). But apple isn’t “evil” right making them ok?
I’m guessing people will also be able to get IE8 from windows update. If people click “use recommended” then MS will just need to put it on the recommended list and shazam! IE8 on the desktop
This is great news, I hope the EC spanks em hard!
Next, Apple should be broken up in to separate hardware and software companies so there is more choice.
There are different rules for companies, I understand it.
Should CrunchPad come without browser?
much ado about nothing, ie will be overtaken soon by firefox, if peiople want a different browser they will download anyway, so i dont see the problem
The problem is, your average user doesn’t know how to get a web browser on their computer without downloading it over the web. It’s a “chicken and the egg” problem.