"The US government has given its thumbs-up to Microsoft's search box plans for Vista, shrugging off concerns raised recently by Google. While criticizing Microsoft for its implementation of its existing antitrust accord, regulators appear satisfied with the software maker's plans for Windows Vista, including a new search box that is part of Internet Explorer 7." On a related note, "the Justice Department is seeking to extend the term of its landmark antitrust settlement with Microsoft by two years, blaming Microsoft's slowness in providing technical documentation to rivals."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
The rules are different when you're a convicted monopolist.
Convicted monopolist? You speak as though being a monopoly is illegal (hint: it's not). You might want to read the relevant court documents. Microsoft was arbitrarily and retroactively branded as being abusive -- there were no real laws or convictions involved, just big government flexing its muscle. Just as arbitrarily, OSnews could be penalized and "convicted" -- after all, the Sheman act been used to bully companies with marketshares as low as 5%. All it takes is failures with a grudge and more lawyers than talent (like Netscape).
MSN isn't just the default, it's the only choice offered. Not much of a "choice", is it?
Microsoft can't be expected to offer a list of the thousands of search engines out there. They've made it trivial to add whatever engine you'd like to the browser (and set it as the default). Just go to any search engine's website, right-click, and choose to make it your default. Done. It's easier than with any other web browser.
But I fully expect MS to make the process for switching your default search provider much more difficult in the final release.
Got enough tinfoil in your hat there?
Member since:2005-07-06
As a point of reference, here are the twelve acts the DoJ retroactively deemed illegal for Microsoft to have used (note that these are not illegal on their own):
1. Prohibiting removal of desktop icons, folders or Start menu entries
2. Prohibiting alteration of initial boot sequence
3. Prohibiting addition of icons or folders of different shape or size
4. Prohibiting use of "Active Desktop" to promote others' products
5. Excluding Internet Explorer from the "Add/Remove" utility
6. Commingling code to prevent removal of Internet Explorer
7. Placement of IAP's product on desktop in return for its agreement to exclusively promote Internet Explorer (or to limit shipments of Navigator)
8. Agreement with ISVs to make Internet Explorer their default hypertext-based user interface
9. Threat to end support of Apple Computer's Office product unless Apple bundled Internet Explorer with the Macintosh operating system
and made Internet Explorer the default browser
10. Contracts requiring ISVs to exclusively promote Microsoft's Java product
11. Deception of Java developers about Windows-specific nature of tools distributed to them
12. Coercion of Intel to stop assisting Sun in improving its Java technology
Edited 2006-05-15 00:19
Member since:
2005-11-10
I think Google went overboard. Nobody has a problem with Firefox, Konqueror, etc. defaulting to Google or including built-in Google support. But the second Microsoft does something as trivial as have a default, they get taken to task (or to court, as it were).
The rules are different when you're a convicted monopolist. You can't legally get away with the same things as the smaller, non-monopoly players. The biggest difference is that Microsoft makes Windows, Microsoft makes IE, and Microsoft makes MSN search, so it's natural to be worried about them illegally leveraging their monopoly position (yet again!) to give one of their own products an unfair advantage in the marketplace. In the Firefox example you mention, the OS maker is different from the browser maker which are both different from the search engine provider, so Firefox defaulting to Google isn't the same thing at all. It isn't even close. Also, the Firefox box gives you a choice of search providers, with Google being the original default. In the IE7 beta I just downloaded, MSN isn't just the default, it's the only choice offered. Not much of a "choice", is it?
Anyway, I think Google's solution to the problem is simple, and they've already implemented it. When you visit Google in the most recent IE7 beta, you see a big yellow box in the upper right-hand corner of the page with an arrow pointing up at the search box and it reads, "Click here to make Google your default search." One or two clicks and that nasty MSN bug is fixed. Choice restored. Thanks for that, Google.
But I fully expect MS to make the process for switching your default search provider much more difficult in the final release.
Edited 2006-05-14 12:48