[sbennett]

In my humble opinion, this case is a waste of time, especially for Opera. If people are given the choice between IE, Firefox, Chrome, and Opera, nobody is going to pick Opera. People don't choose Opera because people don't like Opera.

[BGG001]

sbennett said:

In my humble opinion, this case is a waste of time, especially for Opera. If people are given the choice between IE, Firefox, Chrome, and Opera, nobody is going to pick Opera. People don't choose Opera because people don't like Opera.

It's funny that you say that seeing as companies use Opera's innovations, such as speed dial. (Google implemented this via website and Safari took the idea and put "most viewed" and "favorite" webpages). And it's not that most people don't like Opera, it's more that people haven't heard of it.

[sbennett]

Firefox suffers the same constraints as Opera with regards to competition but has a drastically higher market share.

[dgresko]

This is retarded and here is why:
1. No one,including MS, is keeping anyone from installing whatever browser you like. You can freely install Firefox, Chrome, or whatever you wish.
2. Windows 7 has an option to remove IE 8..its actually an option built into the OS.
3. How are people going to install another browser? Dont you need at least one that works to be able to navigate to the site of say, Firefox and install it? So they provide any person with the IQ of a can of cat food the means (IE 8 installed so you can go get what you like) and the option of removing IE totally.
This is such stupidity and only shows how little the EU understands the technology to begin with. I think Microsoft is just telling the UE to F off and I agree. You want to whine and moan about a removable browser? Fine, try surfing to Google to install Chrome with no browser at all!!! Bite ME!!! I Kinda like what they propose.

[KNRover]

YankeeDLL makes an extremely salient point. If your OS has NO browser, how would you download a browser? Indeed, how would you even order the CD for a browser -- by phone? How would you find the phone number?

Fact is, we've all become totally dependent on the Web to get things like this, and no browser = no Web access.

[PoorBird]

Your question #2.... indeed, I believe one does need IE a minimum of once, unless you get a copy of a browser from a friend and install it....I suppose

that's possible? I'm no great fan of MS, but I am less a fan of government telling me what to do. I have IE, I USE Firefox..... big deal. I believe I shall come down

on rhe side of MS on this one. One thing I do know: I would NOT install someone else's browser on my OS if I were MicroSoft..... "Here is what we have. Use it or

do not use it. The choice is yours to make." That would be my stated policy. What IS the big deal here? The EU regulators apparently have too much time, too

little to do.

[oldbob]

Their point was not to stop Internet Explore but to include Opera also. Since the initial filing, others have joined in as third parties so their browsers would also be included. Now whether Microsoft or the OEMs or retailers do this, there will be additional expenses involved. So free will no longer be free. Man hours and media expense will need to be covered somehow. No matter how they cut it there will be higher cost to the customer plus added bloat ware on your computers. Enjoy government controlling private and free enterprise.

[lespot]

For some time I have had IE8, Firefox, Chrome, Safari and Opera residing on my computer. Why? Because I like to experiment. All of the Browsers have at least one unique feature I like but my weapon of choice is IE8. It does about everything well and is your passport to the entire web. How hard is it to switch between them? Can you move the mouse cursor to an icon and push a button? How much did they cost me? They were all free. What IS the problem here? When I buy a Honda should the dealership be required to also give me a Toyota a Subaru and a Ford? Just who is behind this lawsuit and what HAVE they been drinking?

[Countess666]

you said :

"& found quickly out that some websites won't work unless you DO use IE."

and thats exactly the reason why other browsers with larger marketshare are needed.

the websites that dont work are not W3C complient, and use MS only closed standards are browsers that are W3C complient do not support (with good reason)

those types of websites need to dissapear as quickly as possible. and while MS has added a few standards to their browser they have no added any of the standers the W3C came up with since 1998, stifeling innovation and progress on the internet.

the only way to do that is to make sure other browser gain larger market shares (which FF atleast has done on its own, so this action is a bit late.. but when is the government not late) and more importantly KEEP their market share.

now that FF has made mayor gains MS has started developing IE again. the question now is if FF can keep its market share, because if they cant it wont be long before MS stops developement of IE again and we'll be right back to were we where in 1998.

[Countess666]

why shouldn't they?

they allready let you pick a competators search engine for free, so why not a menu which will download the browser of your choice for you

[technurse]

Sounds as if the EU government officials have little else to do in their spare time. If they really believe what they are doing, they'll now demand that all car companies sell cars with no radios or tires and let the consumer pick their own. And I thought the US government had some silly money wasting projects, MS is not forcing anyone to use IE or their media player or their OS. Maybe they need to force Linux and Apple to include MS IE in their OS. Don't see that happening. Can we waste anymore resources? These people that are pursuing this should be relieved of their duties and replaced with people that can focus on real issues. Perhaps they need to go after the vendors that are selling the computers and force them to install multiple Browsers. While they are at it, force them to uninstall all the crapware they do include. Lawsuit should be thrown out and tell them to go to the PC vendors and have them install their Browsers.

I actually like the one post's idea, just have MS remove their licensing privilege in the EU. That should make everyone happy. Save money and watch everyone panic. Then the EU can go after Apple for not including the rest of the fruit family because Pears and Peaches are feeling left out and while they are at it force Apple to include Firefox, Opera, Chrome and whatever other vendor browser/software companies want. Good thing Hard drives are larger and cheaper. EU will need it to handle all the millions of applications they want to have included when you purchase a computer, just to make sure you have a choice. Make sure you include 12 different anti-virus programs as well so that we all feel included.

I think everyone sees how silly and sad on how much resources have been wasted on this, and people wonder why real issues aren't being addressed.

[oldbob]

Search is just a link out on your browser to the search engine of choice. How can one link out with a browser to a browser download when one does not have a browser? In order for a pick to be made by a menu, all browsers would need to be loaded and available by a click on the menu. One can always uninstall the unwanted one(s). This is not about a plus for the user but a ready option right there in front of them with no more effort than a mouse click.

[oldbob]

Would this requirement to include the competitors browsers be in violation of copyright laws since it is Microsoft doing this. They do charge for their OS and with this being included and selling it would be in violation of the law.

[WinTard]

As a pre-emptive move by Microsoft, simply defusing the issue tells the EU to go stuff it. Go Microsoft! Ignore those self-importance touting EU bureaucrats, show them how they are really insignificant! Way to go! I completely agree, and couldn't care less what Microsoft does in the EU. Not my problem. As long as I get the proper version to Windows here in NA, then all's fine from my perspective.

And if European Community individual members are inconvenienced, I feel for them, but they should be more careful who they elect into government next time election comes around. Credit to where credit is due. And be upset with the EU Bureaucrats, and Opera / Firefox... I would.

~~~~~~~~~~
Many a small thing has been made large by the right kind of advertising.
~ Mark Twain

[GOED]

I don't remember the exact amount that MS had to pay the EU last time around.

But this is what it is all about, they keep trying to have MS fork over billions of dollars in settlements.

Everyone is right here, YOU HAVE A CHOICE, at no point is MS holding a gun to anyone's head to use IE.

As far as OEM's, they could make a shortcut on the destop with a quick pop-up after finishing installation indicating that if they user prefers another browser, they can just click on the shortcut on the desktop / or include the entire third party browser on installation.

The behind the sceens senario with OEM's and MS forcing them to include IE - IF THIS IS THE CASE - The shortcut would not compromise OEM's agreement with MS.

The EU did not want WMP with the OS, ok MS complies, now MS is being told to provide more choices to the EU's customers, fine , now the MS decides not to put the IE on the EU version, they are complaining again. WHY ? simple they want to keep finding ways to sue MS for as much money as they can.

This is absolutly rediculous on the part of the EU.

[Scunnerous]

While I'm no lover of the EC, which is the relevant body here, I'm astonished that almost everyone here is so ill-informed. The problem here is only slightly related to IE and IE is only one of many cases covered by what is Micorosoft's greed and malfeasance. If anyone recalls the real story of IE, it was originally an awful piece of software; it was slow and clumsy but had propietary methods which, once adopted by a few Web sites made a mess of Web browser compatibility AND security - ActiveX is a security risk by its very nature and can never pretend to conform to any W3C standards. That's just Microsoft's way of propreitrizing the Web and the Internet in general which is the ultimate goal, in case anyone had not noticed.

Microsoft's problem is that they cannot bear to see any innovation by anyone else but themselves... because they want to own everything. They did the same with MSN when they first started: an awful effort which was utterly useless compared with Netscape's Web site. Now they want to own the Search market... but for just what reason?... again because they cannot bear to see any other method but theirs develop as a "standard" nor can they stand by and watch anyone, who is not currently a direct competitor, make an honest living out of elegant methods and software. Their strategy is to first come up with a botched implementation of their own, with proprietary "standards" & methods, and proceed form there to take over someone else's lunch, because they know the lazy sheep will just take the path of least resistance.

Their next target is, of course, Adobe. In case anyone had not noticed, Microsoft wants to put Adobe and their PDF and Flash out of business. While Adobe is not doing itself any favors here, if you want to have to deal with yet another Microsoft assault on what are well establishe, useful standards and methods, just download an XPS Viewer and Silverlight... and before much longer you won't have a choice - you'll have to use them instead of an Adobe reader and Flash. Again, in case you didn't know, using a monopoly position in one market to leverage a competitive position in another market is against the law.

For all you jingoistic fools, waken up. This is not about the US vs. the EU. The real scandal here is that the FTC has been asleep at the wheel for so many years, as has the FCC, which is why the US is now at the level of a 3rd world nation in Internet access and communications in general.

[GOED]

MS inovated on their operating system, as a result the company became very viable and sustainable enough to make a lot of money and kill Netscape, but it has also improve on the browser with IE 8 for Vista and now Win 7.

You said it, MS is seeing market share increasing specifically for FF. So, the improvements in FF and IE is what is call competition, after all both browsers are free.

If FF was adhering to MS web standars, then why is it call an Open Source Project, most websites work fine with FF, the one's that don't percentage wise is too little to affect the increase in market share for FF. In addition if FF adheres to W3C standards, then you can't blame MS for FF not displaying a few pages incorrectly. You have to blame the makers of FF.

If it is true that all Web developing companies are using MS standards, then there would not be an increase of FF or Safari market share, since they wouldn't be able to use this browsers. Hence the point of companies adhering to MS Web standards is not valid.

No one is arguing FOR MS, those that don't like IE can easily have a different browser, just because it is included does not mean it has to be use.

MS tries to make the whole pc user experience simple, this does not fall under monopolizing, and let's not forget that MS is complying with all U.S. regulations. Wouldn't you want your products on a sale of a pc so that you make more money.

Isn't this exactly what Apple is doing by just including Safari ? Should we call Apple a monopolizing company too ? NO we should not.

[dgresko]

There is a huge double standard in place. Apple is touted as an innovator and the anti Corporate OS.. but they do all the things they bash MS for and worse.

[dgresko]

A few people here seem to be confused between competition and monopolistic practice. Lets look at this. Talking about what IE used to be and what they do to compete against Adobe is not really the issue here. This issue is the EU wanting MS to bend further when they dont need to. They have given the option to install whatever users want.. so whats the problem? Are people really suggesting that a company that makes software not be allowed to bundle anything they own along with said software? If so, you have missed the point. In a Capitalistic world you compete and make a better product or you die. Grated MS once used strong arm tactics... but thats long overwith and simply doesnt apply here. Once IE was a POS, but they are making it better..which is beside the point that they should be allowed to add IE to anything they sell if they like. Since when did the idea of capitalistic competition evolve into giving handouts to companies who simply dont have competitive products? All competition to IE has the opportunity to be installed...its called user choice. IE can easily be removed from WIN 7 and any browser can be installed....IF the end user wants to. Its about choice here..and MS have given end users the choice. If Opera cant make a better product or fails to market properly and no one wants to install it....screw them....let them die....thats how it works. But we need to stop bashing companies who make a product, market it, and then people actually choose it over another. The handout mentality needs to die a horrid death....



In this case MS is telling the EU , "fine, we wont install any bowser..Go screw yourselves."....and rightfully so!!!!

[BGG001]

Today, the US demands that German automaker, BMW, doesn't install their engines in the M class; instead, they must put in either a Ford Focus engine or a Chevrolet Colbalt engine.

Get the picture?