It seems Opera's case is a bit week, although, I think it's a very good and stable browser. I also support the fact they are willing to go out and fight for the rights of people that use their software, advanced software that they distribute for free out of the goodness of their hearts. I think they have the monopoly on mobile hand-held devices, the mobile browser is much better than the one that came with my phone. I think it would be nice if there was an uninstall option in Windows for Internet Explorer, I never use it, I only use Firefox. In my experience I found Internet Explorer to be slow and cause problems such as security and stability issues. Have we forgotten about Netscape? I love having choices and that's why I hope all these great browsers are around for years to come.

opera is real desperate imo,

How so? Opera is profitable, has lots of cash, and had a revenue increase of more than 50% in the last quarter.

The company is financially healthy with major growth in all business areas. How is that "desperate"?

How is Opera out of options?

It's profitable, had a revenue growth of more than 50% in the previous quarter, and keeps landing huge deals. It's the dominant mobile browser.

So how is Opera out options, exactly?

WHAT MONOPOLY DUDE?
ITS AN OS.

WINDOWS DOES NOT RESTRICT AND FORBID YOU TO USE ANOTHER BROWSER

Actually, it does restrict you due to the proprietary Microsoft technologies on the web that cause problems to this day. Lots of sites still REQUIRE MSIE. My bank, for example.

thats too bad for YOU and your bank, and the obscure websites YOU use.

my bank BOFA, or CITICARDS, DISCOVER, AMEX, BESTBUY etc etc doesnt require no msie.

Actually, it's too bad for the web since this costs both other browser vendors AND web developers a lot of money.

I like to look at it like this.

OS X includes Safari as the default browser, based on WebKit, based on the open-source KHTML rendering engine. Note that while Apple markets Safari and does some customization, all changes to Webkit are given back to the open-source community.

Ubuntu includes Firefox as the default browser, based on the open-source Gecko rendering engine. Both are independent of Ubuntu and Canonical.

Windows includes Internet Explorer as the default browser, which is based on...Microsoft. They control the codebase for both the OS and the browser. If IE was based on an open-source or other 3rd party rendering engine, such as Webkit, Gecko, or Opera's own Presto, there wouldn't be a problem. But by controlling both the OS and the rendering, Microsoft is able to use the browser to further the interests of the OS and vice versa.

It's not about forbidding the use of another browser. It's not even about Opera. It's about being open and playing nice with others.

You present a very rare case. IE7 has made great strides in standard compliance over version 6, although still a few quirks remain, it is nothing major. And all browsers have some sort of proprietary technology, for example, Firefox has style support for rounded corners, Opera has it's little bidirectional XML communication, and IE has ActiveX and a few others. Sometimes proprietary additions are a good thing, they drive innovation of the standards.

"You present a very rare case. IE7 has made great strides in standard compliance over version 6,"

IME All versions of IE do fine with all websites.

IME/O all versions of microsoft websites are made
to not work with browsers that conform to the
the standards that M$ signed to.

Lawsuits probably still exist.
This is very old. So far as I could tell, M$
a long time ago decided to make IE free only
because they would rather give something
away than have a competitor sell it.
Morte Netscape.

It's just one question: who gets to pick what software is bundled with a PC?

In Europe they are seeing that the market only works when the PC builder decides what to offer their customers.

When a vendor with monopoly control of an essential component gets to decide there is less competition, less choice, and higher prices.

If I were them I'd head over to the International Panel On Climate Change. Maybe they could grab some of that carbon tax loot, if the UN ever manages to get their little Global warming protection racket up and running.

Whiny little b****es

I NEVER understood WHY they FORCED MS to unbundle IE from windoze. Since the days of AOL I almost never used window's browser but netscape or whatever. And thats not because it was from MS.

These whiny little opera b****es should just give up on their s***ty nasty a** browser and quit complaining about MS,

OPERA, YOUR BROWSER SUCKS THATS WHY WE DONT USE IT !

do you need that in norwegian ?!
well, babelfish dont have norwegian, heres
dutch:

DE OPERA, UW BROWSER ZUIGT THATS WAAROM WIJ DONT HET GEBRUIKEN!

germanski?

OPER, IHRE DATENBANKSUCHROUTINE SAUGT THATS, WARUM WIR ES NICHT VERWENDEN!

Your nickname says it all...

You are missing the point.

You can install Opera, but you will be forced to use MSIE from time to time due to Microsoft ignoring standards.

You focus only on the bundling issue, when the fact is that there is a second part to this complaint: Microsoft's attitude towards standards.

Due to Microsoft actively undermining standards, other browsers constantly have to chance a changing target because Microsoft has nearly 90% of the market and can dictate what goes and what doesn't.

what? what the hell you pulled that out from?
i never needed to use msie in the past 5 years

if you can install opera what does that have to do with microsoft's standards?

what can microsoft dictate?! its a stupid a** user that has the choice of what buttons to press.

would you like to fondle me?

That's great. You don't need MSIE. Other people do, because lots of sites, especially banks, still require you to use it. And that's a situation which cannot be accepted.

From a FAQ posted on this:

"Q: How does forcing Microsoft to adhere to standards promote choice in browsers?

A: While it is easy, at least for tech-savvy people, to install a different browser, many sites still require you to use MSIE due to their use of proprietary MS technologies supported only by IE, or hacks designed to fix IE's broken standards support, which can themselves break in other browsers. For there to be actual choice, Web users must be able to choose another browser and use it on any site they wish."

Did you ever consider that they don't stick with standards because the standards don't off the functionality they are looking for?

Standards are not the be-all end-all - just because its standard doesn't mean its right.

If the standards don't offer the functionality you are looking for, improve the standards. That's what Mozilla, Opera and others are doing. That's what Microsoft is PRETENDING to be doing as well.

Yes, standard means right. That's why it's called a standard.

And Microsoft has a special obligation to follow standards and not be anti-competitive due to its dominant position. It has failed.

youre just an idiot who wont shut the **** up,
go code some compatible s*** and lets see your name somewhere productive you g**d*** loser.

This is ridiculous! Just because it is installed does not mean you have to use it, this is going the same way when EU sued M$ because of WiMP integration on XP and Vista. Well just remove IE and try to get Opera without a browser (unless you have it on other media). I mainly use FF2.x but I use IE7 when FF cant render the pages correctly. If Windows didn't have a browser/media player there would be someone complaining as well!

You are missing the point.

You can install Opera, but you will be forced to use MSIE from time to time due to Microsoft ignoring standards.

You focus only on the bundling issue, when the fact is that there is a second part to this complaint: Microsoft's attitude towards standards.

Due to Microsoft actively undermining standards, other browsers constantly have to chance a changing target because Microsoft has nearly 90% of the market and can dictate what goes and what doesn't.

are you some sorta broken record ?

"Why aren't they suing firefox since they also have more marketshare?"

Because FF is not tied to Windows. What MS shoud do is this. Have all three browsers installed: IE, Opera and FF and give the user an option which one to set as default or use. There would be an icon for "Internet Browser" and when this is selected or an HTML document is opened, the question is asked. How hard is this?

Then why not have all major spyware players installed too? or all major media players? This, again, opens a can of worms

You are missing the point.

You can install Opera, but you will be forced to use MSIE from time to time due to Microsoft ignoring standards.

You focus only on the bundling issue, when the fact is that there is a second part to this complaint: Microsoft's attitude towards standards.

Due to Microsoft actively undermining standards, other browsers constantly have to chance a changing target because Microsoft has nearly 90% of the market and can dictate what goes and what doesn't.

are you some sorta broken record ?

OperA deserves 6 out of 5!

[Just check what OperA can do [that no other browser[s] can]]!

Firefox can do anything Opera can do (and so much more) with extensions.

However, I'm not saying Opera is a poor choice. I was an Opera user for a long time before switching over to Firefox.

Actually, if Internet Explorer 7 offered Adblock functionality, I'd probably switch back to that.

IE7 with the help of a little extension IE7Pro does offer adblocking and much more.
IE7 with the inclusion of IE7Pro actually is much better than firefox.

IE7 cannot offer the speed of the Opera engine, nor its rendering quality and security.
IE7 has no Full SVG support, no CSS3 (that's already supported in Opera 9.50 Beta). It even can't handle the full CSS2.1 specification. And it has speed problems with javascript.

So NO, IE7 is a bad choice.

opera is s***ty, its interface sucks me

I guess this one comes down to personal preference, as I can't use anything BUT Opera's interface. Everything else seems clunky to me but Opera puts everything where I need it with almost no customization necessary. Been using Opera since the 3.0 days and never looked back.

I love the "Firefox can do extensions" argument. Again, personal preference. I prefer to use Opera specifically because I don't need to install any extensions. Everything is built in and I don't have any add-ons slowing me down. It absolutely kills me, for example, that Firefox doesn't include something as simple as mouse gestures in its default install. Why should I have to go find an extension to do something I do probably once a minute? Opera does things the right way - it keeps features turned off until the first time you attempt to use them and then asks you what you'd like to do.

For example: click on a mailto: link in Opera. It will prompt you to set up an account in Opera's M2 mail client or use your system default e-mail client. Use a mouse gesture for the first time? Opera recognizes this and asks you if you'd like to turn them on. Hit an RSS link? Opera asks if you'd like to add the feed to the Feeds menu. Nice and easy. No add-ons necessary.

Quote:

"Either we support efforts like Opera's, or we just give up and accept the fact that the web is broken, forever."

I just read all the comments so far and realized that IMO everyone missed the point of this case.

Opera is not struggling because of its small desktop market share. They DON'T DO MONEY out of the desktop version of Opera anymore. They don't sell it, there are no ads (as it was before version 7.24 or so).

Opera changed its business model for some time already. They make money out of their engine (which is the same in Opera for desktop, Opera mobile, Opera for Wii, and partly in Opera mini). They managed to create an engine that is standard compliant, fast (actually the fastest available today), incredibly small, and secure.

They blame Microsoft for stopping the progress with its browser. IE6 is a CSS coder's nightmare. IE7 is a lot better but has by far the worst standard compliancy around.

Without IE, web devellopers would be free to adopt and use new web standards (like SVG, CSS3 etc...) a lot faster because they won't have to worry about "will that work in IE6? and what about IE7?". The web will be very different in just a year or two. And it will be the best place for Opera's engine. After that, Opera will have literally no concurrents on the market (specially on the mobile browser market).

This (and only this) is the real meaning of their complains. They want to change the web to have a better place in it. And the big winners of such a change will in the end be the users (and Opera will make some money of course).

I didn't miss that point at all. The fact remains that they are griping over the fact that not enough people are using their product. Boo hoo.

As previously stated, I've used opera since 1999, and I love it. But how is it microsoft's fault that not more people are using it? Why aren't they suing firefox since they also have more marketshare?

I think if opera was better at a lot of stuff than it is, more people would be using it. After 8 years of using it, I've seen a lot of improvements, but the fact is, I HAVE to use firefox for some browsing because some things simply don't work in Opera.

you said: "how is it microsoft's fault that not more people are using it"
Ed said: "hindering interoperability by not following web standards"

M$ has In My Opinion on numerous occasions
tried to break Opera by ignoring contracts
and in fact willfully and maliciously has
tried to use its market share to destroy
and other wise ignore its contractual
obligations.

Ask Sun.

You did miss this point:

They are not griping over not enough people using their product.

They are griping over Microsoft actively working to replace standards with its own proprietary technologies in order to prevent people from using other products.

"Why aren't they suing firefox since they also have more marketshare?"

If you had your facts straight you would have known that this is not about Microsoft having more market share as such. And this is not a lawsuit, but an antitrust complaint. And Mozilla is not a monopolist, and actually contributes a lot to open standards.

You HAVE to use Firefox for some browsing.

Exactly!

You also HAVE to use MSIE for some browsing, even today. My intranet application ONLY supports MSIE. Something simply don't work in Opera, Safari or Firefox because of Microsoft's destruction of standards.

hm, you're right. if that's the point they were making, I did miss it :/

It was all there too: "hindering interoperability by not following web standards"

In the 'good old days' of DOS, you had DOS and you had a text editor ;-)

Why cant Windows JUST be the desktop. With JUST the bare minimum of applications. Notepad, Calculator, File Manager.

THEN everything else be sold as add-on packs.

Of course manufactures can put together their own collections.

Wouldnt this be a lot like the Linux distros ?! a common core (kernel) + Graphic Shell (eg KDE) + Apps (eg OpenOffice, Firefox)

What distro supplies everything as an add-on? Do you think making the consumer have to download everying will give more or less consumer satisfaction?

Doesn't Ubuntu come with a browser? Doesn't mac os x come with a browser? Doesn't solaris come with a browser? In fact, there are only very few OS' that don't come with a browser. This is the internet age, so it makes sense to bundle a browser because that's what we use our computer for the most.

linux? alrighty then, maybe you havent seen that the majority use windows,

and thinking of configuring and commands shells and other bullshiit compile crap makes me vomit

DOS couldn't access the internet, Windows can. AOL, Prodigy and Compuserve don't count because the DOS versions of the client software could not access the internet. They could only access the previously mentioned proprietary online services and not the world wide web.

Inclusion of the browser in the OS is a security issue. Are they that blind?

If Microsoft removes Internet Explorer from OEM or retail copies of Windows XP and Vista then how will DIY computer users be able to easily download a web browser? This could potentially be a catch 22. Not every DIY computer user knows how to use the Unix command line FTP program that was ported over to Windows years ago.

I left Opera a year ago and this is just one more reason to stay away from it.

I dont use FireFox, but I do admire that they achieved in 1 year what Opera could not do in 10. Surely this is a desperate attempt on Opera's part.

After 4 years of using Opera I realized I had heard the word regression used so frequently, that it became the norm.

What do you use instead? I think they all suck, just opera sucks less which is why i've stuck with it.

Opera is hardly desperate.

The company is profitable, and had a revenue growth of more than 50% in the last quarter.

You will hear the word regression frequently with Firefox and Safari as well. It's called software development. Not that you are expected to know anything about that.

maybe you havent tried opera, it really sucks

What Firefox "achieved"? Firefox is where it is today because it had the buzz of being "open-source" and the full backing of Google. In fact, I would attribute the majority of Firefox's success to Google's constant badgering to install it. I'm sure if Google had chosen to support Opera, things would be a bit different.

That said, I find it amusing that Google has chosen the Webkit core (on which Safari is based) for the Android platform over a mobile implementation of Gecko upon which Firefox is based. Perhaps there is a s*** brewing...

"We are filing this complaint on behalf of all consumers who are tired of having a monopolist make choices for them,"

Yeah, my ass.

Make a better product, or move to a different field. We can install Opera fine on Microsoft Windows, I tried it the other day. No messages about Microsoft preventing unauthorised browser changes tried to stop me, no hate mail from Microsoft, nada. Go to www.opera.com, download their browser, run it, click yes that you trust the provider, then the installation works fine.

Like the Microsoft guy said, some brand PCs actually include Opera preinstalled on Microsoft Windows OEM installs too (although the brands I know of are pretty suckey :D )

Didn't Dell have some PCs that you could configure to include Firefox as the default browser out of box? Are these guys saying that Dell cannot do the same thing with Opera?

Should Microsoft not have any browser with Windows? How many home users do you know of that can download a web browser without having one to use to do it in the first place? I could figure it out, but could my mom?

bourgeoisdude, you are missing the point.

You can install Opera, but you will be forced to use MSIE from time to time due to Microsoft ignoring standards.

You focus only on the bundling issue, when the fact is that there is a second part to this complaint: Microsoft's attitude towards standards.

Due to Microsoft actively undermining standards, other browsers constantly have to chance a changing target because Microsoft has nearly 90% of the market and can dictate what goes and what doesn't.

are you some sorta broken record ?

Product can't compete? Sue Microsoft!

You are missing the point.

You can install Opera, but you will be forced to use MSIE from time to time due to Microsoft ignoring standards.

You focus only on the bundling issue, when the fact is that there is a second part to this complaint: Microsoft's attitude towards standards.

Due to Microsoft actively undermining standards, other browsers constantly have to chance a changing target because Microsoft has nearly 90% of the market and can dictate what goes and what doesn't.

IE is still losing market share despite the effort of using its dominant market share and ignorant of standards to hinder other browsers' grow.

Yes I'm forced to use MSIE on some pages when Firefox doesn't render "correctly" but so what, I still use Firefox as my major browser and use IE for let's say 1 out of 20 sites/pages I surf?

Firefox is still growing and most of us know why. Opera isn't growing not because of MSIE or Firefox, to me, it's because of themselves and their closed-source browser. There's no application with features that we all want, so extensibility in the applications is a must-have.

Actually, IE still owns nearly 90% of the market. Recently, Firefox growth has stopped and even gone back a bit.

"Yes I'm forced to use MSIE on some pages"

EXACTLY! You are making my point. TO THIS DAY, you are required to use MSIE for some sites due to Microsoft's actions.

"Opera isn't growing"

Wrong. Opera is growing. In the third quarter of this year, Opera's desktop revenue increased by more than 100% due to more users.

But that doesn't change the fact that IE still has nearly 90% of the market EVEN AFTER THE LIKES OF GOOGLE HAVE SPENT MANY YEARS AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS TRYING TO FIGHT IT.

Again, personal preference comes in to play here. I prefer using a closed-source browser. In fact, I prefer using closed-source everything if I have the choice. By controlling the development, Opera is able to add new features quickly and efficiently. All I've heard from tech pundits lately is how Firefox 2 is slow and bloated compared to Firefox 1.5 and that 3.0 isn't looking much better. To me, open-source hasn't proven itself to be an optimal method of software development. And before the flamers start flaming, I'm writing this post using Opera 9.5 beta running on Ubuntu. I know what open-source software can do and it's not quite there yet.

Personally, I would actually prefer to use Opera over Firefox. The problem is that Opera doesn't allow 3rd party plugins and extensions. I use a password manager called RoboForm, which works with both IE and Firefox, but obviously not with Opera. This is the main reason I will never switch to Opera. Sorry, but I'm not going to input several hundred logins/passwords into Opera's crappy The Wand password manager and be locked into a single browser. As long as Opera keeps their code completely closed and all 3rd party applications locked out, it will NEVER succeed. Period.

It's not crappy if it's all you know. Tried RoboForm once, found it big, bloated, and unnecessary. On the other hand, if I didn't have my Wand, I wouldn't know how to log in to anything.

I don't want any extensions, I don't want anything from a 3rd party weighing down my browser. No add-ons is a GOOD thing.

I also use RoboForm but opera wont alow it. sorry Opera ill stick with IE 7 till you change this.

I use Opera mostly with Hotmail (now Windows Live
Hotmail) because I have more than one ID and
M$ makes it a PITA to sign out--I have Opera set
to delete all cookies. (Yes, I could link the
ID's, but than they wouldn't be all separate)
What I noticed over the years is every little
while Hotmail would stop working in Opera and a
short time later Opera would have an update, and
Hotmail would work again.

As a side note. I don't know how long Firefox
has been "popular" but I expect M$ to start
trying to break it 2 to 3 years after it starts
being a "threat" to IE--that's about how long
it takes M$ to notice anything non routine.

Did you just use a dollar sign instead of an S in Microsoft? That is so clever! Did you think of that? It's so funny because they like making money (unlike other businesses) and because an S sort of looks like a dollar sign! You're really cool! I have a great idea, instead of calling it Internet Explorer we should call it Internet Exploder! Ha ha!

In case you've been under a rock for the past few years Firefox already became a threat to IE, why do you think they suddenly got off their duffs and made IE7?

Use Opera for Hotmail/Live? Ok, crawl out from under the rock, the aliens are gone.

Seriously, you do know that Live and Hotmail have a feature called Login Assistant and also lets you link multiple Passport/Live IDs, so you can access all your mail boxes, by signing into just one account that is authorized/linked?

Oh and you can set IE to delete the same crap as Opera does on exiting, so even if you want to use the old kill the cookie method, just turn that on in IE.

Geesh.

me: "(Yes, I could link the
ID's, but than they wouldn't be all separate)"
you: "Login Assistant"

1)a I opened my newest hotmail account very
many years ago, before they started their pass-
port "service"-my newer addresses are not
with M$.
1)b Login assistant is not easier than than
launching Opera, clicking the magic wand,
double clicking my user name.
2) Another family member used IE4, 5, & 6 and
I did not like the grunts about "[sites not
remembering]" that were caused by my deleting
cookies (separate windows 9x/NT/etc weren't
an option because that could have messed up my
DL of the collected works of Shakespeare).

"why do you think they suddenly got off their duffs and made IE7?"

Good point, and in fact they even started letting
windows update work in FF.

No, actually that still doesn't work with FF. I just tried it yesterday and it still sends back a message saying that you must be using a Microsoft based browser to do that. You must be thinking of a different browers there.

You gonna be kidding me. Login Assistant is the thing that you have your name on the page (WLMail), you click on the arrow thing besides your name to show a list of your other accounts. Simply click one of those names will get your profile switched. You really think that launching Opera, deleting all Cookies, and go to WLMail site and sign in is easier than Login Assistant?

--sigh--.
To login to hotmail I: click the icon in the
quick launch bar, click the magic wand in opera,
double click the chosen user name. To log out
I close opera--total login time is some 6 sec.
Logout, about a quarter sec or less.

But my on topic point was my observation that
hotmail would stop working in Opera, and would
work again after the Opera update--my opinion
of that was M$ was probably deliberately doing
something nonstandard to break Opera on HM.

I did successfully run windows update in FF-had to disable Admuncher and
set the service "automatic updates" to "automatic" (I prefer "disabled" ;)
to get it to run but it did, and installed updates and rebooted....

Now, new box, different install of windows, sort of the same install of FF*:
WU won't load in FF. Won't load is different from the 'you gotta use IE'
message I got before WU worked.

I'm sure I'd consider that an interesting problem and might pay attention
to how on Dead Box clicking the start menu item WU launched FF and how here
it launches the ugly and probably functional IE7 (A fun set of edits to get
working IIRC) but bored now. Leaving.

*installed FF to the new root drive. Went to the old root drive. Overwrote
all FF on new root with stuff from the old root and did get settings, book-
marks, history... back.

Opera: don't blame Microsoft for your inability to make and market a product that a large percentage of people use. Maybe you have a better product (don't know, don't care) or a more standards-compliant product (again, don't know, don't care), but the way to win the game is to get people to use your product. Mozilla did it and continues to do it, why can't you? Perhaps you need to rethink your marketing strategy, and pour more resources into that, rather than waste them on frivolous lawsuits.

I'm so tired of companies and government bodies (EU) whining when things don't go the way they want. Microsoft makes the operating system and should be allowed to include in it whatever they want, just like everyone else. The only thing they shouldn't be allowed to do is pressure hardware vendors into selling MS products.

Yeah, that is all fine and dandy until it crosses the line into being what is called a "Monopoly". Then we get into that pesky little area called anti-compeitive business practices. Once a company crosses the line into using tactics that qualify as preditory capitalism, that is where the government, and the court system, are perfectly justified in stepping in and bringing things back to what would largely be considered a level playing field thought the use of things like injunctions and court orders.

The same rules do not apply to all companies under all conditions. Once a company has reached a monopolistic position in a market they are held to an entirely different set of standards of behavior, and rightfully so.

I think you need to reread what I said. I explicitly stated that Microsoft should not be allowed to pressure hardware vendors into selling only Microsoft products.

Don't confuse a monopoly with anti-competitive business practices. One is legal and one is not. Microsoft should be allowed to strive for as large a market share as is possible, as long it does not use its dominance to pressure vendors into do something improper.

the thing is if you have a product that is selling so well, even if you Don't pressure anyone, the vendor's are going to sell your product because if they don't, they go out of business.

Agreed. In addition, recall what Microsoft has been caught doing in the past to their business partners due to their legal, but highly anti-competitve Monopolistic position in the market. Microsoft has repeatedly been caught using strong-arm and intimidation tactics to bend vendors and system builders to their will.

They have been caught "laying out the rules" by which vendors and system builders are allowed to play by, or Microsoft will simply revoke their ability to sell Window OS at all, or raise their licensing fees on the OS to the point where they can't be compeitive and will simply go out of business. That is the functional equivilent of putting a gun to someones head.

I don't know about you, but that is EXACTLY the definition of anti-competive business practices in my book. It isn't the monopoly that is illegal here. It is the blatent abuse of that advantageous market position that results in the adoption of illegal business practices that become available to a company that enjoys that monopoly position. You see, one very quicly and easily begets the other.

You are missing the point.

You can install Opera, but you will be forced to use MSIE from time to time due to Microsoft ignoring standards.

You focus only on the bundling issue, when the fact is that there is a second part to this complaint: Microsoft's attitude towards standards.

Due to Microsoft actively undermining standards, other browsers constantly have to chance a changing target because Microsoft has nearly 90% of the market and can dictate what goes and what doesn't.

are you some sorta broken record ?

Opera is filing now because of the victory against Microshaft three months ago.

For those ignorant of history (eg. more than six months ago) before Firefox came along, Opera had surpassed Nutscrape as the second most popular browser. Microshaft and several of its affiliated companies began a targeted and anti-competitive campaign against Opera.

Microshaft began designing its websites with scripts to detect Opera. If a person tried to view a Microshaft site with Opera, the script caused the website to be rendered improperly which Microshaft then claimed was a flaw in Opera's browser. However, if an Opera user changed a setting and made Opera identify itself as Infernal Exploder, the website would display the same as if using Infernal Exploder.

Clearly, this was not a flaw in Opera but rather a deliberate act to inconvenience and harass Opera users as well as Opera itself. It was anti-competitive and unethical. One has to wonder what Opera's market share would be if this harassment had not happened.

Now that Microshaft has lost one case, it clearly gave Opera hope to file a long overdue case of their own. I wish them luck and hope they win; the merits of the case are certainly not at issue, only whether Microshaft will try to outspend Opera, or worse, try to bribe the court.

just for kicks and also my attempt at being cool, let's call Opera, Oprah. har har, not funny but just trying to be like you! hehe

Did you forget how to spell microsoft? its like 3rd grade English

You could have had a well thought out post there but using words like Nutscrape and Microshaft make you sound like a complete idiot. Sorry but it's true.

What an excellent and mature post.

Is like it like?

Perhaps this will some how bring much needed attention to Opera. Prior to Firefox, Opera was perfectly content to just sell it's browser for $39. They weren't the least bit concerned about market share. When Firefox came on the seen and became wildly popular almost overnight, the folks over at Opera have been envious and jealous ever since. If it were not for the emergence of Firefox, Opera would still be $39 or Ad supported.

Opera simply missed their opportunity. Their browser is good and is getting better but unfortunately everything they are doing comes too little and too late.

Bottom line? Switch to a Mac, use Safari and add the Saft plugin for it. :)

[quote]Perhaps this will some how bring much needed attention to Opera.[quote]

They hope - it's not like anyone realizes that Opera is even available anymore. Crap - does anyone know what percentage (do they even have a full percentage point - outside of their own servers that is) of use?

You are missing the point.

You can install Opera, but you will be forced to use MSIE from time to time due to Microsoft ignoring standards.

You focus only on the bundling issue, when the fact is that there is a second part to this complaint: Microsoft's attitude towards standards.

Due to Microsoft actively undermining standards, other browsers constantly have to chance a changing target because Microsoft has nearly 90% of the market and can dictate what goes and what doesn't.

I just had to jump on this one.

"...unfortunately everything they are doing comes too little and too late."

What a load of crap. Let's see...

Opera invented the precursor to tabs (in 1994), Page Zoom (1994), was the first browser to block pop-up ads (2000), first to add a Search field in the browser toolbar (2000), Sessions (1996), deleting private data (2000), Mouse Gestures (2000), User JavaScript (2005), BitTorrent support (2005), Widgets (2006), and Speed Dial (2007).

And that's only a partial list. Yet Firefox takes this stuff and puts it in and gets 1% more market share. Why? GOOGLE

opera doesn't think they will actually win. This is simply about getting in the news so people will check out Opera. Most people don't even know about opera. The timing was perfect for this suit. Had they filed earlier then the EU case would have over-shadowed this. Now that EU is over, they will be the main story.

People moan about IE not being 100% W3C compliant. The truth is that only people on tech boards care. The other 99.999% of the population doesn't care or even have a clue what it means. They know that they can fire up IE and it works. Why should MS devote time to get that one rare Javascript/CSS incompatibility working, when they know that the website builder will work around it?

You people than moan about standards compliance really don't have much business sense.

Go learn something about web standards. Following web standards can significantly reduce filesizes, download times, response delays, and bandwidth usage, while increasing options (such as using XSLT for rendering into other formats) and making it easier for those who have accessibility requirements (such as the blind). That's good business sense, being able to maintain code easier and slash bandwidth costs while making websites more responsive. It's not just tech board members who care. Why would you think that?

We're not asking for 100% compliance. We want more than lip service and doublespeak. We want a decent attempt at a decent product. We want something that doesn't put us at the mercy of every website we visit.

I wish for IE to be bundled with my purchase of Vista Ultimate. Please allow the maker of an OS or other software piece, to bundle any other software they create, for their consumers.
Opera "devs" please feel free to create your own os. Thank you :D

the question is:

"will the fat-lady get to sing?"

You forgot that Netscape (the original code for Firefox) already settled out of court against M$. Also, a LOT more money has been dumped on the Mozilla foundation than Opera could ever hope, as a private software company, to get its hands on. Different case completely.

just to clarify, there is not much (if any) Netscape code in Firefox. Netscape started the FF project and donated resources, etc... but I believe the original code was from scratch. I was actually an original tester of the code during the old days (1997ish) when they were releasing milestone builds.

The thought from Netscape was that they would take the outcome from FF and wrap their junk around it for the new Netscape browser. The problem with this was that it took MUCH too long to develop FF than anyone originally anticipated. The first Netscape branded FF was V6 (i believe) and it was buggy, bloated and horribly slow. This helped kill and glimmer of hop Netscape had left. Netscape 7 was much improved, but too little too late.

Opera rules, but this lawsuit is lame. Who is having a monopolist make choice for them? Anyone is able to change browsers as they please.

To opera: you need better marketing, boys.
Firefox had an edge because it's part of the mozilla open source stuff. Come up with your own instead.

(footnote: I've been using Opera since 1999)

You are missing the point.

You can install Opera, but you will be forced to use MSIE from time to time due to Microsoft ignoring standards.

You focus only on the bundling issue, when the fact is that there is a second part to this complaint: Microsoft's attitude towards standards.

Due to Microsoft actively undermining standards, other browsers constantly have to chance a changing target because Microsoft has nearly 90% of the market and can dictate what goes and what doesn't.

are you some sorta broken record ?

It's not a lawsuit. It's a complaint. See this FAQ so you and everyone else here can be educated:

http://my.opera.com/haavard/blog/show.dml/1582238

Very glad to see people using Avant and Maxthon.. But as you should know that IE7 makes both of those browsers better since they use the same engine as IE7.. So, since Im using Avant I would much rather have IE7 installed then still have IE6.

Heres hoping IE8 makes MS leap back into the browser competition strong!

The inside talk is that Maxthon v2.x.x will actually be the new IE8. Maxthon was the ONLY web browser company that was allowed to have a mini-booth inside the giant Microsoft pavillion at a big recent industry trade show while all others were excluded. That right there should tell you someting about the future of IE8.

Or, maybe Microsoft doesn't hate Maxthon because they use IE underneath anyways. Surely you don't expect them to invite Mozilla to their parties.

They did actually. In fact Foxy and Bill have had quite a few meetings of late.

what? why would you encourage more broken web standards? that's the dumbest thing i've ever heard.

no doubt since firefox is making inroads on market share and microsoft is researching ways to embrace, extend, and extinguish as per the MO.

If Microsoft is having ANY meetings with the Mozilla/FireFox/Netscape camp it is only to trick them and find out new and creative ways to kill them off.

Microsoft has long since shown that is has little if any actual interest in being a serious browser developer. They release browsers that are at best, years behind the compeition and then they only update them occassionally as an afterthought when they absolutely have to to avoid major customer backlash. Clearly they do not take browser development seriously at all.

The next major release of IE will liklely be the result of the outright purchase of a major player in the browser market where they just fold in their technology and call it IE8.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if that were to be Maxthon as MS has already shown that they favor Maxthon above all others by letting them have space in there tent/pavillion at major trade shows while keeping all other browser companies out. That right there should speak volumes about what is coming down the pipe.

Don't be surprised at all if IE8 looks and performs VERY much like Maxthon 2.x.x when it finally ships.

IE can't compete on its own; no one would buy that POS. And even if you offered it free as a separate download, why would anyone want a non-W3C compliant browser? Might as well be be nuts enough to use Office 2007 and save your documents in the failed MS-OOXML format. Microsoft will do anything to avoid competition. Firefox and Google are direct evidence of that. Oh yeah, and that whole thing people call Apple.

Decouple ie from windows and watch it rot from its own code.

*whine*

Apparently it's good enough.

Too bad you can't be content to let people who do not want to choose alone.

Nope.

You have to take the defaults away from them and force them to configure it themselves because *you* don't think it's good enough.

Poor baby...

Many knowledgeable folk use and like IE7, I am one of them.

im not convinced.

what could possibly be bad about more people using third party browsers over IE? IE isn't even cross platform making it a pain to develop for using anything but windows. that in itself should be criminal, but i dont make the laws.

Those who like IE (and there are many) will use it whether or not it is W3C compliant. Same with Office 2007 and MS-OOXML.

I'm sorry but I just don't buy that arguement. Not even for one second. I have NEVER met, or even heard of, one single person that was an IE7 user, that went out and tried Maxthon, Avant, FireFox, Opera and Safari and STILL decided to stick with IE7. Unless you are a Microsoft employees and/or you are required by your job to do so, I just cannot see how ANYONE would, of their own free will, choose to stick with IE7 after really evaluating all of those other browsers.

If you are telling me that you honestly prefer IE7 over ALL of those other alternative (read much better) browser choices, you would be the first and ONLY person I have EVER heard of that has said that.

Opera rules. If they should make some marketing... Well, even if I do not like the idea, maybe they need to do so, but not too much, I do not like the idea of spyware designed for Opera either (keeping userbase under 10% make that unlikely).
About sueing MS, I hope they win. They deserve to scratch some of the beast gold.

They deserve to scratch some of the beast gold.

I'm very interested in learning why you think Opera deserves to take money out of Microsoft's pockets.

What entitles them to someone else's money, pray tell?

I think we forget that the EU was mostly communist and the majority of people out there are former proles - with their hands out - expecting everything to be given to them.

Now that they have to work at something, they're in a quandry. No one ever told them to buck up, put your shoulder the wheel and start moving.

their browser is better in:

standards support
speed
cross platform availability
overall features

you know, the little things. that said, they're probably feeling that it's a bit unfair that MS can use windows to deliver competing software for free where they would need to pay people to embed it, and that being said, if it were to be found that ms encouraged oems to avoid other browsers, it could be seen as a monopoly abusing its ability to foist something onto the dimwitted consumer which further stifles progress on the web, especially since they've still not embraced standards support.

but that's just the opinion of one developer who abandoned the MS train.

Most of the EU? Which nations were commies, I can only think of a few on the Eastern side - they're probably the most capitalist, its France you should be bothered about - who have never been run by commies.

I'm sure your superior knowledge of a foreign land beats living here though, I figure you'd bomb us if you could find us on a map.

Based on some of the underhanded, shady, dirtbag, blatently anti-competitive moves we have seen Microsoft pull in the last dozen years or so, I find it very hard to see how anyone can dare scold a company like Opera for taking ANY type of legal action against Microsoft in the courts.

For the good of the market in general, just at a broad level, I would think we would want to see more companies with the guts and gumption to challenge Microsoft in the courts, not less.

Having said that, I personally think Opera is a great browser. It is very creative and innovative and, recall that is it the #1 rated most secure browser with just its default configuration. It successfully blocks more pop-ups, pop-unders, floating ads, etc. than ANY other browser on the market, right out of the "box". (Think I'm wrong on this? Go test it yourself on some of the browser testing sites, you will be very surprised at the results)

Personally, I like Maxthon and Avant slightly better just on their interfaces, but Opera is very good as well. And, they are constantly improving and updating it. It's certainly FAR better than IE7, across the board.

I have to say, it absolutely amazes me that IE7 still has the high market share that it does. How is that possible? In my personal opinion, it is the WORST web broser of ALL of the alternatives/options that are out there. Why is ANYONE out there still using IE7? That doesn't make any sense to me. The ONLY people still using IE7 have to be people that still don't realize they can use other, alternative web browsers.

Companies like Avant, Maxthon, Opera, or FireFox need to run some national TV or radio commercials and let the world know that their alternatives are out there and they are WAY better than IE7.

Microsoft absolutely should NOT have a 77 percent market share with their IE7 browser at this point. At best, their market share should be about 7 percent right now, if you ask me. There are a LOT of very uninformed people out there still I guess.

So as I said before, what can MS do, totally remove the browser from the OS? Or should they ship the OS with every browser ever made? If they ship it with just Opera, than Mozilla will get mad. If they include Mozilla, then Apple will get mad. If they include all Browsers, then the email client companies will get mad because windows has a default email client built in. I guess the alternative is MS just ships the kernel and it's up to the end user to manually install Email, Web Browsing, Desktop GUI, CD/DVD Burning Utility, zipping utility, and tons more things that are now installed with Windows yet there are alternative software solutions out there.

Even if you do not install Internet Explorer, its still there. Ive removed it, yet, i still keep getting IE windows from various occasions. Such as when using Valve's Steam application, clicking news items etc. will pop up a IE window and not the default browser of choice. In my case, Firefox.

Theres no way you are be able to remove "IE" without breaking something else in the process. Perhaps this is the problem, i dont know...

Good question. What would be wrong with including copies of ALL major web browsers on the OS CD/DVD's so that the consumer would actually have a choice? Why not do that? That way, you could pick what web browsers you did or did not want to use right from the start? Personally, I would LOVE to see each OS shipped come with IE, Maxthon, Avant, Opera, FireFox, Navigator and Safari (and any other web browsers that might like to be included as well).

That would be great! Then consumers would KNOW they have a choice and could try them all out and then make their own decisions. Or, do what I do: run MULTIPLE browsers every day.

Recall here that not all browsers are created equal. Some do certain things better than others. There are times when Maxthon is better and there are times when Avant is better. I don't use one browser consistantly for anything. I am constantly switching among multiple browsers thoughout the course of a day as some site just work better on certain browsers.

"What would be wrong with including copies of ALL major web browsers on the OS CD/DVD's so that the consumer would actually have a choice?"

That would open up a big can of worms...where will it end?

Email client companies:

"You now need to include a CD with ALL email clients"

Antivirus companies:

"You now need to include a CD with ALL antivirus clients"

desktop search engines:

"You now need to include a CD with ALL desktop search engines".

etc etc....

What is designated as "Major" web browsers. Who gets put on the CD/DVD and who doesn't. Some people prefer Firefox 1.5 over 2.0 so does that mean you have to include all major versions as well? Would "Joe's Computer Shack Web Browser" (sorry I don't know a small browser name) which has 2 users (Joe and his wife) be required to be on that? Would all browsers fit on a DVD? And again, what about Email client? What about Media Player? etc. Do you really want (my first computer) grandma getting a computer that has 65 DVD's including all the possible software she might want to load on it and figure out what she wants?

"What would be wrong with including copies of ALL major web browsers on the OS CD/DVD's so that the consumer would actually have a choice?"

Well, if you define "major web browsers" as those browsers with a greater than 30% market share, then MS is technically already doing this. ;)

speed dial kicks major ass

Very funny. :)

Well, what would be wrong with just including the top five or six alternatives by market share for the previous year: Maxthon, Avant, FireFox, Opera, Navigator, Safari. At least that way you are giving the consumer some choice right from the get go. Those are all free so why not?

And sure, you can do the exact same thing with all the free e-mail clients that are out there and the free anti-virus and anti-spyware apps that are out there. Nothing wrong with that if you ask me.

I wonder why they just stopped with Microsoft. Why don't they sue Apple over Safari, and most Linux vendors for bundling a browser too.

As to the web standards thing. IE7 is a lot better at that then IE6 is. I think they are trying to get there. They just can't change this stuff overnight because it still has to work with all the code that's out there now. Heck Microsoft can't even get everyone to upgrade to IE7. My company won't because the crappy code they wrote for our intranet apps don't work in IE7.

I'm no lawyer but I would bet that Opera would have a tough case on a company that owns 5% market share, and that's why they wouldn't go after Apple or Linux. Plus every one I know that has an Apple computer never uses Safari.

Yes I wish everyone would update to IE7 as IE6 is a CSS programming nightmare. IE7 still has alot of CSS issues but it is extremely better than IE6.

i use it quite frequently and their RSS reader built in is awesome. In fact, safari 3 is even better than before though still lacking a session restore and it adds some greatly improved UI improvements as well as better standards, faster rendering, and a few new features (my fave being dashboard widget making, and web inspector for development).

Wow.

I thought the folks at Opera had more brains than this. I don't use the browser but I did have respect for it, if only because it was an alternative.

They just lost that.

They've been around longer than Firefox and still have less market share. Why don't they just go ahead and sue Mozilla as well?

Suing for market share. Gotta love it.

But hey, according to pitdimwit, if it's free, market share doesn't matter, right?

roflmao...

Ouch, the stupid, it burns! Ignore the Microsoft troll, folks. His tiny brain hurts if he has to think.

Wow PC...these guys are so bored and uneducated they actually go out and make a website, dedicated to some guy they never met on some forum, that is awesome, congrats!

The pathetic, it hurts!

Isn't it?

What's so amusing is that this one freely admits he's an unemployed, uneducated, shut-in, living in his mom's basement...

I'm amazed hails of derisive laughter don't follow him wherever he posts.

Wow that is really sad. You would fit right in at the blu-ray forum. They don't have anything better to do either.

Talk about an exercise in irrelevancy and I'm not surprised that such a flame arises in an article where one company whines when it does not get it's way and blames someone else. I don't know either of you guys and I don't post very often. although I've been reading BetaNews for years. Everyone has a right to their own opinions and beliefs, and when you start making personal attacks on someone for such things, you just make yourself look like as idiot. For example, I'm agnostic, but my son continues to believe there is a God...so do I attack him because he chooses to believe in something I don't? No, nor would I infringe on that basic right that everyone is guaranteed (unless of course you are not a US citizen). You won't win hearts or minds by attacking folks because they don't agree with you, or you them. And while I personally may not agree with what PC_Tool has to say, I think he's one of the more intelligent contributors here who can make a point without resorting to these kinds of childish tactics. That's how you get the attention of others...be diplomatic, use your brain (which you say you don't have on your own page...but you must have common sense?) and present your argument in a mature manner. If you can do that, then I will defend your right to speak your mind...but if all you can do is make hate sites in an attempt to belittle someone else then perhaps it's time to examine who exactly is the troll. Obviously PC_Tool isn't giving you the reaction you so desperately want...that should tell you something right there. Think about it.

You are missing the point.

You can install Opera, but you will be forced to use MSIE from time to time due to Microsoft ignoring standards.

You focus only on the bundling issue, when the fact is that there is a second part to this complaint: Microsoft's attitude towards standards.

Due to Microsoft actively undermining standards, other browsers constantly have to chance a changing target because Microsoft has nearly 90% of the market and can dictate what goes and what doesn't.

are you some sorta broken record ?

it's sad. Sounds more like desperation than anything else. Plus I haven't seen the developers really push Opera out there like Mozilla did with Firefox

So does Opera just want Windows to be shipped without a Web Browser. If it doesn't come with a web browser how are people going to be able to go to Opera's website to download the browser? If they want Windows to ship with Opera then what's to stop all the other browsers from forcing MS to do this. I'd rather my computer come with IE and then I download the browser I want then for it to come with 10 browsers and I have to remove 9 of them.

"So does Opera just want Windows to be shipped without a Web Browser. If it doesn't come with a web browser how are people going to be able to go to Opera's website to download the browser? "

Easy fix: Bundle all browsers on a disk free with the PC. User's choice then.

Do you any idea of how many support calls that would generate?

I've just made jobs for the economy :)

It was said in jest, as it will never happen.

Plus, you could just set up an automated help-line.

"Look in the box; there's a CD. Put it in the computer. Install one of them. Hang up the phone."

Then they'd call back and ask which one to pick and what's the difference. The people that don't care about a browser will just use IE if they have a PC or use Safari if they are on a Mac. I see no problem with that. It is up to Mozilla and Opera to tell us why we would want to change.

Technical support not in your past experience, eh?

Lucky you.

Had it been, you would know that such things as automated prompters and such do little more than delay the user calling in. :)

Don't supply any people whatsoever to talk to.

Put support documentation online ^_^

3.) Go bankrupt when PC mag publishes your support score....

If the support documentation is online, how do they get to it without a browser installed?

Well I guess they have to have IE installed as a default so they can get the documentation to know what the difference is between browsers, to know which cd/dvd has opera on it and to know how to install it. Oh wait that's how this whole mess started.

Install the Lynx browser by default.

Or OffByOne if they really want graphics.

Let them have a taste of real speed ;)

(And with any luck those sh***y bandwidth wasting Flash based websites will die :)

... thus the ^_^

*sigh*

You are missing the point.

You can install Opera, but you will be forced to use MSIE from time to time due to Microsoft ignoring standards.

You focus only on the bundling issue, when the fact is that there is a second part to this complaint: Microsoft's attitude towards standards.

Due to Microsoft actively undermining standards, other browsers constantly have to chance a changing target because Microsoft has nearly 90% of the market and can dictate what goes and what doesn't.

are you some sorta broken record ?

*Sigh* I love Opera, but that is an uncool thing to do at this stage.

No, it's the only thing to do at this stage. To quote someone else:

"Either we support efforts like Opera's, or we just give up and accept the fact that the web is broken, forever."

Absolutely. The less Microsoft-centric the world is the better off we will all be. Remember that Microsoft is to software what Wal-Mart is to retail.

Both have gotten WAY to big and WAY too powerful in their respective industries. Both have gotten corrupt and been caught red handed in the past in illegal/unethical business practices - REPEATEDLY!