RSSThe EC's latest objection: Is it time to unbundle IE from Windows?
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published January 19, 2009, 11:41 AM
For many, it's a very tired, old argument; but for politicians in Europe, it remains a rallying cry: Microsoft, says the European Commission, is using its Web browser unfairly.
At the height of the Microsoft / Netscape browser war a decade (or was it a century?) ago, Microsoft argued that so much of Windows' functionality relied upon the HTML rendering capability of Internet Explorer that it would be technically impossible to divorce the two from one another. That argument was raised in response to objections from lawmakers and judges worldwide, including in the US, that bundling IE with Windows gave Microsoft an unfair advantage -- and at the time, many saw that claim as somewhat self-serving and artificial.
Nevertheless, it worked. Up until now, the company has never been forced to offer Windows customers an alternative to installing Internet Explorer by default.
But last Thursday, according to a statement over the weekend, the European Commission sent Microsoft a new formal Statement of Objections, which raised the whole bundling issue once again. Though the exact content of such statements are always kept private, last Saturday's press message from the EC -- attributed to spokesperson Jonathan Todd -- said that the Thursday statement alleged that the bundling "distorts competition on the merits between competing Web browsers insofar as it provides Internet Explorer with an artificial distribution advantage which other web browsers are unable to match.
"The Commission is concerned that through the tying, Microsoft shields Internet Explorer from head to head competition with other browsers which is detrimental to the pace of product innovation and to the quality of products which consumers ultimately obtain," the EC's press bulletin continued. "In addition, the Commission is concerned that the ubiquity of Internet Explorer creates artificial incentives for content providers and software developers to design websites or software primarily for Internet Explorer which ultimately risks undermining competition and innovation in the provision of services to consumers."
Once again, the Commission is threatening fines and regulatory intervention should Microsoft be unable to sufficiently explain itself within the next eight weeks -- which is the grace period it's giving the company to present an oral defense.
Microsoft's response to the Commission essentially acknowledges having received the Statement, as well as its opportunity to present a response. But it also adds this one tidbit about the contents of the Statement that the EC's bulletin omitted: "According to the Statement of Objections, other browsers are foreclosed from competing because Windows includes Internet Explorer. The Statement of Objections states that the remedies put in place by the US courts in 2002 following antitrust proceedings in Washington, DC do not make the inclusion of Internet Explorer in Windows lawful under European Union law."
If Microsoft's characterization is accurate, this may mean that the EC is planning to penalize Microsoft for its allegation that the US government's settlement with the company did not go far enough.
With Microsoft having instituted far more transparent and open corporate policies since 2002, and with its having been seen as embracing the concept of standards to the point where its position in driving their creation has come under scrutiny, the question arises of whether the Internet Explorer Web browser functionality -- just the front end, not necessarily the rendering engine that other Windows components rely on -- truly has to be included in Windows by default. Conceivably, the company could -- starting, say, with Windows 7 -- offer consumers links to alternatives such as Firefox and Opera (which, some believe, may have prompted the EC to file its latest Statement against Microsoft).
But the company could also argue in US courts that being forced to offer such a choice is itself unfair, under the logic that neither product is being offered commercially. Under US law, had Opera raised a similar complaint, it may have been compelled to estimate how much sales Opera loses on account of Microsoft's bundling practices. Since Opera's principal PC browser isn't sold, such an account may be difficult to ascertain.
There's also the argument that Opera may be hurt by far more competition-related factors than just IE's alleged "ubiquity." The latest NetApplications estimate of browser usage share, based on HTTP requests processes by sites which that firm tracks, state that over 21% of the world's requests are being sent from Firefox browsers, with almost 8% now coming from some flavor of Apple's Safari, whether it's on Mac, iPhone, or Windows. That is not to say that one in five browser users are on Firefox, but rather that a fifth of HTTP traffic appears to come from Firefox.
Less than 1% of traffic comes from Opera browsers, which remains less than Google's current Chrome browser -- which is far from ubiquitous.
Something that will be a pain in the butt. How the heck will people be able to get online to download the browser?
They'd need a browser to download internet explorer or firefox or whatever they use. IE is a requirement. Just because Microsoft has it embedded, doesnt mean people always use it. They only use it to get another browser, then IE is just left in background to run the actual OS apps.
The only other way they could get a browser is by buying a magazine, or paying a computer technician to install it for them and who'd pay that much money just to get internet explorer/firefox from a magazine cd. Its a waste of money. The EC are stupid.
I noticed it's all pointed at Microsoft too. I'll bet you any money they'll target Apple and Linux soon for having browsers on their OS's once they killed the Microsoft OS.
Score: 0
|If Microsoft takes IE out of Windoze, most Europeans will choose either Safari or Firefox. IE is hideous.
Score: -1
|I'll choose Firefox any day of the week... even on Mac OS X.
Score: 0
|"According to the Statement of Objections, other browsers are foreclosed from competing because Windows includes Internet Explorer. The Statement of Objections states that the remedies put in place by the US courts in 2002 following antitrust proceedings in Washington, DC do not make the inclusion of Internet Explorer in Windows lawful under European Union law."
Oh riiiiight, I see - silly me. The US courts are now telling the European courts what is and isn't legal - yes of course!! Now that's been made clear we can disband the European courts and just take direct insruction from the US courts. In fact, why stop there - there's no need for courts in any countries around the world, because the US courts rule supreme! I understand now. [smacks forehead]
What a complete bollocks defence! [tsk]
The allegation is that bundling "distorts competition on the merits between competing Web browsers insofar as it provides Internet Explorer with an artificial distribution advantage which other web browsers are unable to match." The reply by Microsoft does not answer that allegation, it just says - boo yah sucks, we don’t need to listen to you. And that just ain’t good enough boys. [shrugs]
Score: 0
|Hey, everyone, the next time either Tool, or foxfart, replies to your postings with their libertopian nonsense just post this link and you can then easily dismiss them.
http://sethf.com/essays/major/libstupid.php
Score: -1
|Here's the idiot with his made-up words again, just like a toddler... The difference being that there's hope for the toddlers to actually grow up and be able to use their minds. :)
Score: 1
|I am tired of hearing everyone complain (goverments or otherwise) how Microsoft is bundling this or including that in an operating system - if you don't like it simply go find a new product and get over it! Last I checked no one is holding a gun to the EU or anyone's head saying that they have to use IE or Windows Media Player or Solitare lol.
I fully believe that it's Microsoft's right to include whatever software they want in Windows - as long as they're not decieving the public about what is included. I do not believe that it is their responsibility to tell the public, well if you don't want ours go find the alternatives here - that rests on the user. It would be like Ford telling a customer "If you don't like our car, the Dodge dealership is 1/2 mile down the road on the right.".
I just wish people shared a little more common sense and realize these things. It's just like an article I saw a while back in our local newspaper complaining on how the local supermarket chain was "ripping people off" - last I checked they could go to another supermarket if they don't like the prices - a great part of capitalism is that consumers can make their own decisions.
Score: 0
|I has nothing to do with them including the software with windows, that would be a good thing (eg. for 3rd party software and pre-install updates that need an internet browser), but I think what Microsoft are doing is blatanty wrong in not giving people the option to uncheck the Internet Explorer as a independant install. As you say you no one is saying you have to use it but as you already stated WMP and solitare (games) are independant installs and can be removed from Windows at any time after install, where as IE can not therefore taking up hard disk space.
Score: 2
|If they do remove IE from Windows then many third party applications won't just run.
Just like no body buys Windows with no media player installed (N), the samething will happen to Windows 7 (N)...LOL not even OEMs will do that. It's so easy to download firefox and install it.
Score: 1
|I do not understand why there is so much noise by EU for removing IE. Agreed Microsoft is bundling it with their OS, but so is Apple doing the same thing with Safari, then why does no one has objection to it. And I do not think Microsoft is forcing anyone to use their browser, you are free to install any other browser over windows machine. At least I think it is much better than Apple business model where they force users to buy only their hardware and use software designed for their hardware.
And what about many Linux distributions bundling Firefox? No one is raising question here either.
EU just want money from Microsoft and nothing else.
Score: 0
|The EU uses its court system and regulatory bodies to restrict and control trade and companies that do not reside in the EU. Its as simple as that.
They have a hard time competing, and restricting foreign companies is an attempt to give their domestic companies a better chance to compete. Just like ISO900x was a series of extremely expensive certifications that had nothing to do with quality that were simply one more expensive bar that foreign companies had to jump over before they could deal in Europe.
But watch out, or the Frog farmers will all pull their tractors up and block your driveway! LOL!
Score: -1
|http://sethf.com/essays/major/libstupid.php
Score: 0
|Wow, what an insightful post rather then debate you perceive them to be something they may not be, bravo.
Score: 0
|Why debate idiots like you, terminalx? Just by opening your mouths you automatically lose. You can't help your mental condition and that is why your kind should be pitied. Its a waste of time and effort debating the mentally deficient like you.
http://sethf.com/essays/major/libstupid.php
Now I know what a $2 w.h.o.r.e. looks like by example of libertopians. They give themselves away so cheaply to their corporate johns.
Score: -1
|There is something so wrong with you, words cannot begin to describe, judging people on the internet because they don't fit your views so you ASSUME they are this made up term some idiot who wears too much tin foil and saw one too many black helicopters is truth...right..
For someone who claims to be an adult, it scares me you act more like a child then my 4 year old daughter does...
Score: 1
|Until another browser releases a full set of .adm policies, alternative browsers are useless to our corporation.
Score: 0
|So Microsoft is successful, but Apple's Safari is less successful--why can't the EU see that they are DISCOURAGING competition?
Score: 1
|"With Microsoft having instituted far more transparent and open corporate policies since 2002, and with its having been seen as embracing the concept of standards to the point where its position in driving their creation has come under scrutiny, the question arises of whether the Internet Explorer Web browser functionality"
I can assure you that is not the reality perception of the Brussels administrations scene. Quite the opposite. Opera's filing of objection was because they were so personally upset with the Open XML case in Norway. Guess what company undermined the functioning of the standard process there. Ever heard of "Mr. Topics Map" Steve Pepper? Ever heard of what the Norwegian government did as a reaction to Microsoft's action in the standard committee.
And then we have Microsoft sending its lobby troops this year to undermine the European Commission European Interoperability Framework version 2. And the company acts as if it was at home in Brussels or European public institutions and itself were on the same level. Microsoft advocates for its own idiosyncratic definition of "open standards" that renders the term open meaningless.
So competition professionals make their own conclusions and they have a brilliant researched case. So Microsoft can escalate it, take a political road or obey. If the company decides to do the first, good luck! Then competitors as IBM and Google just need to watch the ambush, provide for sufficient public scruntiny and reporting and all actions will fire back so hard.
Score: 1
|Yet, somehow Firefox and Chrome are doing well, you do realize this is Opera'
s doing right?
Score: 0
|The reason this case was brough about was IEs complete disregard for standards compliance.
Remember, Opera started this case before Microsoft decided that IE8 was going to require the meta tag for IE7 rendering mode and not for the standards mode.
It, in part, was responsible for Microsoft changing their mind and having it the current way round for the meta tag rendering modes.
While it may appear like they're whining about IEs bundling and their own crap market share, the case was not started for this sole reason. It was to help force MS's hand in to being more standards compliant.
Score: 0
|...and that's OK?
Score: -2
|Quite simply: Yes.
Score: 0
|So one company should be able to force another, by some unrelated law, to support a standard they (for whatever reason) don't want to?
Cute...
I guess corporations shouldn't be able to decide what should and shouldn't be included in their own products anymore. We'll just let the government handle that...
Score: 0
|Its time for MS to tell the EU, to take it or leave it.
The EU and the companies there need MS MUCH more than MS needs the EU.
Let the politicians whine, the EU business community will eat them alive if they try to ban MS Windows.
Score: -2
|You are joking, right? That is why Linux, FF and Opera have much higher marketshare in Europe than any other area of the world?
Score: -2
|Nitwit, if IE is a part of WINDOWS, simply refusing to debundle it effects WINDOWS!
Run whatever browser you want on whatever OS you want!
But the enterprise is dependent upon WINDOWS!
You miss the ENTIRE point!
Who gives a #$%@ over what browser they use?????????????
And if they use Linux instead, then who cares about what Windows does?
Even your own rant contradicts your own premise!
Score: 2
|While they have higher market share in Europe than elsewhere they are by no means GREATER in market share than Microsoft.
Score: 0
|"Nitwit, if IE is a part of WINDOWS, simply refusing to debundle it effects WINDOWS!"
Am I to believe you actually meant:
Nitwit, if IE is a part of WINDOWS, simply unbundling it effects WINDOWS!"
Score: 0
|Poor babies.
Part of you want MS to provide the other browsers if it deletes IE as the poor stupid users will have no brwoser for the Internet without it, yet others whine about it being bundled.
Deleting it means little. Including it means little.
If MS wants to include it, it is their choice. If they suudenly want to distribute Firefox, (and FF has no oibjections, they can do that!
And if you don't like that, then don't buy Windows!
Or, if you buy Windows, you can easily delete IE if you don't like it!
Big F@#$%&# deal.
Its all much ado abo0ut nothing. And the EU and their enterprise constituency needs Windows MUCH more than MS needs the EU. All MS has to do is stand firm or stop sales if a fine is leveled. Then sit back as the enterprises barbecue the politicians.
Sorry that this is SOOOOOOOO komplekated for you EU folks. ;-)
Score: 1
|Never mind Foxfart. He's a libertopian idiot who doesn't live in reality. He'll w.h.o.r.e. himself at every opportunity to anything corporate.
It is because of his way of thinking that America is in the mess it is now. One truly has to feel sorry for the dumb creature that he actually is.
Score: -2
|LOL!
Tweenboy managed to tear himself away from watching Britny videos on his TV monitor to drop his one trick pony word he read somewhere without bothering to find out what it means.
Newsflash Tweenboy...the rest of the civilized world uses a computer for computer related work (preferably with multiple monitors), and has a dedicated home theater for movies and TV. Who in hell wants to watch a movie 2 foot from the screen? But please, tell us about your mommy's car again...
Score: 1
|*laughing my a** off*
Yeah, his way of thinking....not the welfare state, victim mentality, or our dependance on the misery of others for entertainment....
Yeah, you nailed it.
Thanks for the laugh.
Score: 1
|See what I mean. He's a total and utter loser and proves this every time he opens his mouth and sticks his foot in it..... I guess that foxfart has never heard of a multimedia system... He's so jealous of what others have. He's probably just stealing time on the company's computers while he should be working. That and him looking up porn of little children....
Score: -2
|Oh, yet another libertopian loser. The Tool. Do you and foxfart want a room to be alone? You're just as deluded as he is and you just proved it with your completely untruthful statement. Like all libertopians you love to lie and also w.h.o.r.e yourselves out to ANYTHING corporate That's why you're such a loser. I feel sorry for you as well to be so completely in the dark about the real world.
BTW, please reply to me and continue proving just how much of an a.s.s. you truly are. I dare you to. Come on coward. Show us just how much you really hate the average American.
Score: -2
|Google Search: Define: libertopian
"Did you mean: define: libertopia
No definitions were found for libertopian."
Get a clue, you ignorant twat. :) The word has no meaning, yet you use it like an insult. It's like a 3rd grader calling someone a doo-doo-head, only in this case the 3rd-grader would be *far* more intelligent than *you*.
But please, don't stop posting this drivel. I enjoy laughing at your constant flow of complete idiocy.
Score: 2
|Tool, please never change. You're the most perfect idiot I've ever met, that is next to foxfart.
Libertopian = Libertarian + Utopian. A libertopian is an idiot who wants to live in libertopia. I didn't make up the word. Your kind did. [smiles] You're the best evidence against such delusional thinking.
The Free State Project: good idea or "libertopian" fantasy?
by Steve Trinward
http://www.rationalrevie...tevetrinward011203.html
There is also this which will help people understand the mental condition that you, and your ilk, suffer from and why they should pity you for it.
Libertarianism Makes You Stupid
http://sethf.com/essays/major/libstupid.php
Also, like all of your limited kind you have to copy off of others. The saddest thing is that you don't see just how much of a joke you are. They say that imitating is the sincerest form of flattery. [smiles]
BTW, you can't insult me since I know what you are and that negates any and all of your efforts before you can even open your mouth. You've already lost just by being a libertopian idiot.You just can't win. Its just automatic and there is nothing you can do about it. You've provided me with yet another victory. Please continue.
Score: 0
|Someone that recites the same speech over and over using new terms that are not recognized anywhere except on some random site...yeah I am going to believe that because everything they say on the internet is true
See!
http://www.snopes.com/lost/mistered.asp
Mister Ed was a zebra the internet says so!
Score: 0
|Yeah, you constantly justify being pitied, terminalx. In your so-called "defense" you bring up a talking horse. Something that everyone knows is not possible. This is why you choose it because of your delusion that libertopianism is a valid belief system instead of being just as fanciful as Mr. Ed. The article I posted sure did show your number right on the head. You sure love to use fallacies as arguments.
Let us name the fallacy that you're using. Could it be Two Wrongs Make a Right? Straw Man? There are so many to choose from.
Score: -1
|Its a joke, you know like yourself and spouting such nonsense.
Its not to be taken serious, good lord, you must be a blast at parties....
Score: 0
|No, YOU'VE missed the point! (What's with the caps and exclamation mark? Calm down dude.)
Basically Windows was coded specifically to integrate IE so that it would be impossible to remove. Don't sit there at your keyboard and tell me that an operating system can't be coded without an integrated browser.
Score: 0
|*yawn*
sjc001: Proving his complete idiocy to the entire world, one post at a time.
Dude, it's not a word. Combining two words doesn't make it one. Common knowledge, bud.
Second, I'm not a libertarian, I am a Social and Fiscal Conservative. Look it up.
Lastly, please keep this up. There seems to be no end to your BS, so I am sure it will be no trouble for you to spew more nonsense (as proven by your new posts above...how "zridling-esque" of you).
Score: 0
|"libertopianism"
*laughing my a** off"
Oh! Oh! Make up another new one, genius!
Score: 0
|"Don't sit there at your keyboard and tell me that an operating system can't be coded without an integrated browser."
Of course it can, that was never at issue.
"Basically Windows was coded specifically to integrate IE so that it would be impossible to remove."
No. IE was integrated for two reasons: First, to hopefully garner some gain in performance (if the libraries are already loaded, no load times). Second, they fully intended, and to some degree did use those same libraries for other parts of the OS such as Help, Active Desktop, file/ftp browsing, and so on. Their intent was originally to place as much of the functional OS UI on top of that as they could. That didn't pan out (because it was a bad idea from the beginning), but it had nothing to to with "making it impossible to remove".
Do you actually think they'd do something that involved to little or no gain (deleting the icon=removed to 99% of users)?
Oh, wait... I remember now. Microsoft is Evil™...
Score: 0
|Score: 0
|@ Aires -
uh, are you talking to yourself, I used an exclamation point to express a point of how ludicrous his statement was then you go on some wild tangent that had nothing to do with what I was talking about...
stupid comment system appears broken...
Score: 0
|This new forum display for posts and replies is crap. There seems to be no continuity from previous replies and it seems there are people who don't know which reply is meant for them. This forum is just eye candy now but is a waste of time for replies. This will be my last ever post in this current format. Sorry guys @ BN but this format isn't working for me - why for example when you give a thumbs up or thumbs down does the whole page have to reload?
Score: 0
|@term -
I believe Aries reply was to Foxfyre. The comments system sucks for navigating threads, especially those that are more than one or two comments deep.
Score: 0
|Seriously? This is what the EC is concerned about? We keep hearing that we could be repeating the 1930s (depression), but I think with the EC being concerned about Microsoft's bundling of Internet Explorer, it is a repeat of 2002.
Most copies of Windows come from OEMs, pre-installed on new PCs. Those OEMs have been installing several different browsers for years now. The last new PC I saw, a Vista laptop from Dell, had Firefox and Safari on it (I don't remember if Opera was there too). And Microsoft makes it very easy in Vista to change the default browser.
So really, who cares about this anymore? Move on.
Score: 4
|Microsoft frequently use their monopoly in one area to leverage a potential monopoly in another area.
IE is a perfect example of this. There is no reason for the browser to be so tightly integrated into the OS.
Score: -3
|Then genius, don't use it and download ANY of the myriad alternative free options available!
Or is this simple solution for those who don't want to use IE SOOOOOOO kompleeekated???
Instead of whining, DO IT!
Score: 0
|Alas, using IE is something you do all the time in Windows regardless of whether you use the actual 'program' itself. It is integrated throughout Windows (certainly with XP - I'm uncertain about Vista/Win 7).
Score: 0
|LOL!
You can easily delete it!
And what code runs internally on the machine is moot!
You don't like it, don't buy Windows.
Are we going too fast?
Score: 0
|"LOL!
You can easily delete it!
And what code runs internally on the machine is moot!
You don't like it, don't buy Windows.
Are we going too fast?"
I was stating a fact. I didn't say whether or not I give a s*** that it is integrated throughout Windows.
Score: -1
|Why is the EU making this a big deal again. Is it unfair for all of the other browsers to not be incorporated into Windows? Do they want Microsoft to bundle ALL browsers in to their operating system? Is it a monopoly? IT CANT BE A MONOPOLY. ALL OF THE BROWSERS ARE FREE. I have never seen someone complain of unfair business practices to get their FREE product in. Give me a break. Worry about something else worthwhile.
Score: 2
|While it may be free for the user it still generates money for the company.
Score: 1
|It takes me a very short amount of time after installing any MS desktop OS to have a link to firefox on the desktop; it's usually among the first things I do. What's the big deal if IE is installed already? Until MS blocks downloads of alternate browsers, this is a non-issue. Safari comes preinstalled with OS X; why isn't the EU throwing fits over that?
Score: 3
|IE's integration in Windows has always bugged me for many reasons. I do not want my desktop to be the internet. I do not want every browser vulnerability to also be an OS vulnerability. I do not want to be forced to waste bandwidth on occasionally hostile web content either, so I never stream anything with WMP. I do not want anything going into or out of my system behind my back for no good reason. I do not want my every move being sent to Microsoft so they can analyze my usage patterns or anything else! In short, when I install an operating system, I expect it to operate my computer, and nothing else. Your browser should be like a virtual machine, a sandbox where you can experience the internet in a contained space. IE is more like an information superhighway straight to your hard drive.
Score: 1
|Actually, since Vista IE is not buried inside Windows...If IE is damaged or goes to hell it doesn't affect the OS only the browser..
Also you don't have to send anything to MS if you don't want to, that's what a firewall does, it lets you know whats coming in and going out.
Score: 0
|MS really bundled IE deep inside Windows after DOJ ordered to remove it, while fighting against Netscape, a long time ago. After windows 95, Microsoft forced its integration deep into the OS. The result was the hell of vulnerabilities we still live today.
Activex is crap, MS java was poisoned and the entire IE was deeply tied to windows by whim and not by need. We still suffer from that today. And the way to solve the mistake is a pain of incompatibilities.The step needs to be taken!
IE should remain to basic stuff, but not deeply tied to the OS, is not that hard to do it, really!
Score: 0
|Actually, since Vista IE is not buried inside Windows...If IE is damaged or goes to hell it doesn't affect the OS only the browser..
Score: 0
|To be honest, there was no need to integrate it in terms of competition or bundling. They integrated it because they thought it would not only garner them performance gains, they fully intended to make use of it for many UI-related functions (Active Desktop, file browsing, Help & Support, etc...) in order to cut back on duplication of effort (Why use multiple engines for a bunch of things that can all use the same engine?)
Score: 1
|so let's say they take out internet explorer completely from Windows. no web browser installed in windows...period. if you just purchased your first computer and had no link to the outside world from before...how would you get to the internet to download a web browser to start? ms isn't going to just bundle other software in their OS for you to pick, it's not their software (if buying a retail version)...unless it would come from dell, hp, or something like an OEM.
also, let's say MS were to just pull out all of their operations in of Europe all together. can they still be sued over this stupid crap?
and lastly, IE is a choice. i've seen advertisements in newspapers and articles in other magazines other than tech magazines about using firefox and opera. people know it's out there and the firefox numbers continue to grow, right? so why the big deal over and over with these politicians who once again, probably have better issues to worry about....
Score: -1
|" if you just purchased your first computer and had no link to the outside world from before...how would you get to the internet to download a web browser to start?"
A CD bundled with the computer containing the 5 most popular browsers of the time would be the best way to do it in my view. This would be distributed by the EU, and not by Microsoft, so the EU can incur that cost for being arsey about it all.
"also, let's say MS were to just pull out all of their operations in of Europe all together. can they still be sued over this stupid crap?"
No.
However, pulling out of Europe isn't good business sense for Microsoft. They still make WAY more money than the fines take back from Europe.
Score: -1
|Its not MS's responsibility to distribute others programs!
If they leave it out and you want something else, YOU can go buy it elsewhere! After all, the EU is the one that don't want IE!
And MS doesn't have to do anything. The EU is the one's that would effectively ban them. All MS has to do is say - OK, and then let the Enterprise users who are dependent upon MS retaliate against the asinine politicians.
The EU is its own worst enemy.
You don't like IE, then don't use it! Its easy to remoive! Or are the geniuses in the EU simply too stupid to figure this out? Or is it that while the politicans whine for political purposes, that few in the EU actually don't want it?
But I love the issue as stated - MS shouldn't include IE, but if they dont' MS should distribute the other browsers! Compelte and utter BS - or, to put it into something the EU might understand better - Bullocks!
This is an old tired argument.
Move on EU.
Score: 1
|"Its easy to remoive!"
I'll ignore the spelling and grammatical errors. It may be 'easy' to remove, however removing it in its entirety breaks the EULA as some components belong to the OS itself.
As you see from my comment below, it's ludicrous for them to be chasing this. I'm just suggesting the scenario on from this when the EC (inevitably) fine them.
"But I love the issue as stated - MS shouldn't include IE, but if they dont' MS should distribute the other browsers! Compelte and utter BS - or, to put it into something the EU might understand better - Bullocks!"
I didn't say that. I said the EC should incur the cost of distributing other browsers.
*Edit* This is presuming you were replying to me. You can't tell with this new BN layout.
Score: -1
|Deleting IE in NO WAY violates any Eula!
Get your head out of your posterior!
And as if idiots in the EU understand English.
You folks are the ones with the non-standard spellings of so many words! And the irony is the fat fingered spelling error was a typo. The other aspects are parodies aimed at the ever so sophiscated EU snobs who attempt to control foreign companies by their head up their @ss court system that functions as an attempt to restrict and regulate trade policy - just like your lame @ss ISO 9000 program that was designed specifically to limit foreign competition.
Score: 1
|"Deleting IE in NO WAY violates any Eula!
I'd be damn surprised if it doesn't. Maybe not in name - removing IE the skin - but seeing as many different components of Windows rely on the rendering engine (Help & Support is a prime example), I'll bet it does.
"And as if idiots in the EU understand English. You folks are the ones with the non-standard spellings of so many words!"
That's a hilarious statement that you lose on before even beggining.
"And the irony is the fat fingered spelling error was a typo."
Obviously. However, the dropped apostrophe probably wasn't.
Score: -1
|Speaking of one's own worse enemy, foxfart......
http://sethf.com/essays/major/libstupid.php
This fits you to a tee.....
Score: 0
|*Sigh*
I haven't understood the logic of IE having to be unbundled from Windows ever.
Don't get me wrong, I'd LOVE it to be unbundled, but it's Microsoft's product and is part of their O/S, just as Safari is part of OS X. There is NO good reason why Microsoft should be forced to remove it (or give links to others).
"Since Opera's principal PC browser isn't sold, such an account may be difficult to ascertain."
I'm not sure whether the author is suggesting Opera get no money out of their browser or not here.
Search boxes, as is the same with Firefox is where (some/most of) the money comes from. It should be quite easy to quantify.
Score: 1
|this s all a way to make money, nothing else.
Score: -1
|What next, Calc? Paint? Notepad? ooh, ooh, maybe they should be fined for bundling a GUI?
Score: 2
|"Thursday statement alleged that the bundling "distorts competition on the merits between competing Web browsers insofar as it provides Internet Explorer with an artificial distribution advantage which other web browsers are unable to match."
So let these other browser companies create an OS with there browser bundled. Just like what Google is working on.........oops, is that still a secret ?
Score: 0
|EC just want the money. They don't care what MS do. Whatever it is, whether they were for it or against it, they're get fined either way
Score: 0
|