

Microsoft caves to EU pressure, will offer browser ballot - ZeroGravitas
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/07/microsoft-caves-to-eu-pressure-will-offer-browser-ballot.ars

======
rottencupcakes
Here's Microsoft's official statement, along with an document detailing their
specific terms (the top 10 browsers with a marketshare over 0.5%) and a ppt of
a mockup of the ballot page.

[http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2009/jul09/07-24sta...](http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2009/jul09/07-24statement.mspx)

------
yumraj
I wonder why is Apple is not treated the same as MS. In other words why no
noise over Apple bundling Safari with MacOS or iPhone etc. EU should ask Apple
to do the same with Mac OS also. A smaller marketshare should not be an excuse
for implementation (or not) of law and policies.

What MS did was evil back when it killed Netscape, I cannot even dream of
defending them for that, but let's get over it and treat all OS vendors
equally.

~~~
BrentRitterbeck
I'll agree that what Microsoft did to Netscape was wrong, but I don't see how
either offering several browsers or requiring Windows to ship without Internet
Explorer is needed. If people don't like Internet Explorer they can easily
download a variety of other browsers. While it may have been difficult for
someone with little computer experience to do such a thing a few years ago, I
find it hard to believe that people can't figure this out for themselves these
days.

~~~
vidarh
Anti-trust law requires a monopolist to not make use of their monopoly
position in one market to gain advantages in another. Assuming one accepts
that there is an independent market for browsers, and that Microsoft has a
monopoly position, it's pretty hard to argue that pre-installing their own
browser does not make use of their monopoly situation to gain advantages in
another market.

That _users_ can download other browsers is irrelevant from the point of view
of anti-trust unless you can show that users would make the same browser
choices when one of the browsers is pre-loaded as they would if they had to
explicitly pick one.

While the end-goal is to ensure consumers are not deprived choice with the
resulting problems, the direct objective of anti-trust law is to protect the
_competitors_ of monopolists, regardless of whether the short-term effect on
consumers is negative, as the long term detrimental effects of trusts are seen
as too great (through direct experience with a large number of them...)

------
lionhearted
I've always thought the browser-based antitrust cases were ridiculous. There
was a huge demand for web browsers, and Microsoft included one for free with
its OS. It made Windows way more useful right out of the box.

~~~
likpok
I agree. It seems that the result of this is that Microsoft cannot make a
better product (by adding value) rather than helping consumers.

