

Europe Closer to Fining Microsoft Billions Over Failure To Offer IE Alternatives - ezdebater
http://techcrunch.com/2012/10/14/report-europe-inching-closer-to-fining-microsoft-billions-over-failure-to-offer-internet-explorer-alternatives/

======
Zenst
I live in the EU and have legal install of windows for XP,Vista and Win7 and
can saftly say I already installed another browser and found the whole chose
one option provided as a required patch most annoying.

Sad thing is any user at the level of not being able to install a alternative
browser are also the users more prone to have botnets and other malware
installed upon there compter. That is the real issue that the EU has not
addressed, Microsoft offered a alternative idiot install alternative and I for
one found it most annoying.

The EU have better area's to attend to thesedays and I'd hate to suddenly find
out one day that chromebooks suddenly have to offer Microsoft browsers as a
alternative, or iPad's demanding user pick another browser or not.

It is when there is no alternative choice and for windows that has never been
the case to date (not sure about tablet windows flavours). That can not be
said for other operating systems and iOS at some point was a little rejecting
of alternative browsers in its central dominating app store. Windows had
netscape before microsoft had a browser, always been alternatives and easy to
install and associate. The only issue is that they expect people who are
unable to handle that trivial task on the internet blindly without even saying
no Microsoft they must pick a antivirus program before they connect to the
internet. That would of been useful inforcement, but nope.

At times I do wonder if I sent in a CV on punched cards to the main EU office
that they would not only accept it and convert onto 8" floppy disc for me for
free. I think that is an old joke, but there again so is the point in time the
EU are on about and even then they missed the real issue.

~~~
zizee
A key difference between Microsoft Windows and other operating systems is that
it was declared a monopoly _.

Being deemed a monopoly Microsoft Windows is held to different standards to
all the other options that you mentioned.

That said, I think that we are approaching at time when Microsoft shouldn't be
considered a monopoly.

_did that happen just in the US, or did it also happen in the EU?

------
jiggy2011
This might have made some sense back in ~2002 when all other browsers were
DOA. Seems almost cruel to watch the EU stomp a dying browser further into the
pavement.

Surely it would be more fitting for the EU to look into UEFI or Windows 8 RT
which IIRC will not allow other browsers at all.

~~~
arturadib
You do know IE is still by far #1 right?

~~~
jfoutz
Really? <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers>

~~~
mtgx
Everyone is counting Chrome at 30% or higher. Net Applications is the only one
that counts it at under 20% and IE having the most market share. What he hell
kind of stats are they taking there? For some reason Ars Technica keeps using
theirs stats over others, too, even though I'm sure their own website's stats
are a lot more similar to the others than to Net Apps' numbers.

------
mrj
You all are being unfair. Whatever you think of the settlement, Microsoft
agreed to these terms. Then it simply stopped abiding by the agreement.

Microsoft is clearly in the wrong here.

------
outside1234
headline should be: "europe is going bankrupt and needs to find people to tax
and companies to shakedown so they don't need to reform."

~~~
kalleboo
Legal battles between Microsoft and the EU have been going on since before the
euro was even introduced.

------
justinschuh
For those not actually reading the article, this goes back to the multi-
billion dollar EU ruling from 2004. Microsoft appealed it for years and
eventually reached a settlement in 2009, which reduced their fine to a
fraction of the original ruling. However, one of the key requirements of that
settlement was the browser ballot, which Microsoft has been violating (as they
admitted, but stated the noncompliance was unintentional). Since Microsoft
breached the terms of the settlement, they're now potentially on the hook for
the original fine plus whatever else applies.

------
jpiasetz
When are they going to fine Apple? I don't get a choice on iOS...

~~~
desbest
The definition of a monopoly according to the US government, is a 60% market
share.

As Apple doesn't have a 60% market share on smartphones, they are allowed to
do what they want.

~~~
glomph
What does the US government have to do with EU law?

~~~
catch23
I think it's 40% of the market for EU laws. At least it's 40% when they start
investigating you.

------
bztzt
I don't know how this failure happened, but I'm certain it wasn't intentional.
IE market research has been tracking the effect of the browser ballot closely
and found it to be almost completely negligible - the people who don't pick IE
from familiarity / brand recognition are the same people who would have
downloaded another browser anyway. They wouldn't have risked another
legal/PR/financial fiasco over that. I'd really hate to be whoever's
responsible for whatever snafu was the immediate cause ...

------
kabdib
Time for the EU to go back to the Microsoft piggybank. Ka-ching!

~~~
thirdtruck
Microsoft continues to commit the corporate equivalent of a parole violation.

The EU cannot "go back" to the piggybank, given that Microsoft has still left
its pre-existing obligations unfulfilled.

------
tomrod
Tis is kind of sad. What are the legal reprecussions if MS tells the EU to
take a hike? No desktop windows in EU?

~~~
chmod775
My guess would be this plus possible legal actions against individuals (should
they really tell them to "take a hike").

------
pooriaazimi
Question: I think if you disagree with (software) patents, you must also
disagree with these anti-monopoly laws. Everyone must be equal and free to
compete, even companies with trillions of dollars in bank.

It's 3 AM here so I can't make a good case why I feel that way (so I rather
not to, in case I'm misunderstood and people waste their time arguing about
what I _don't_ mean), but I want to know what others think about it. Most
people hate IE and to a degree, MS. But it shouldn't matter whether we like
them or not. They must be allowed to do whatever they want even if it hurts
the industry.

~~~
SEMW
> I think if you disagree with (software) patents, you must also disagree with
> these anti-monopoly laws.

...Do you have a reason for thinking that? The connection isn't obvious.

If your reason for disagreeing with software patents is an aversion to
government intervention then, ok, sure, that reason would also extend to
disliking competition law. But if your reason for disagreeing with software
patents is, say, because you don't like that they grant the patent-holder a
monopoly on the subject of the patent and you don't like monopolies, that's
pretty compatible with having a high regard for competition law. And if your
reason for disagree with software patents is something else entirely, that
might not point to any particular position on competition law at all.

~~~
pooriaazimi
To be honest I can't understand your comment right now (I'm tooo sleepy - it's
5:35 AM!), so I can't comment on that. But the gist of what I was getting at
was this: is government intervention in a free market "a good thing"? Even if
it is to (temporarily?) protect us from the evil of Big Co.?

------
desbest
Relevant. <http://xkcd.com/1118/>

