Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 17th Jan 2009 15:29 UTC
Internet Explorer After successfully battling Microsoft over the company's bundling of Windows Media Player, the European Union is now ready for more. The European Commission has charged Microsoft with violating competition laws because of the Microsoft's bundling of Internet Explorer with Windows.
Thread beginning with comment 344065
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
From reality ...
by Moulinneuf on Sat 17th Jan 2009 19:46 UTC in reply to "From the article ..."
Moulinneuf
Member since:
2005-07-06

What as Firefox market share number your citing to do with Microsoft Breaking the law ? Nothing ...

Is Firefox anti-competive to it's competitor ? No ...

Firefox create it's own competition.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: From reality ...
by modmans2ndcoming on Sat 17th Jan 2009 23:02 in reply to "From reality ..."
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

Please explain this "anti-competativness"

What have they done? the core of the US case was that they went out and actually forced OEMs to not install Netscape on their computers. THAT is anti-compatative. Having a default browser on a desktop isn't.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: From reality ...
by Moulinneuf on Sun 18th Jan 2009 09:52 in reply to "RE: From reality ..."
Moulinneuf Member since:
2005-07-06

What have they done?


1.Bundled there OS with the browser in such a way that competition can't fairly compete.
2. Pushed the price of internet browsers to zero.

Amongst other things.

Having a default browser on a desktop isn't.


Why are you against offering choice ?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: From reality ...
by WorknMan on Sun 18th Jan 2009 01:51 in reply to "From reality ..."
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

What as Firefox market share number your citing to do with Microsoft Breaking the law ? Nothing ...


Read the part of the article I quoted again:

The executive arm of the European Union had dispatched a "statement of objections" to Microsoft, in which it formed a preliminary view that the firm had prevented rival browsers from competing
, the U.S. software firm disclosed [/q]

If MS had prevented rival browsers from competing, then how is it that Firefox was able to carve out a 20% marketshare for itself?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: From reality ...
by Moulinneuf on Sun 18th Jan 2009 10:03 in reply to "RE: From reality ..."
Moulinneuf Member since:
2005-07-06

If MS had followed the law they would not be not be accused of anti-competitive practives ...

Firefox Marketshare as nothing to do with Microsoft breaking the law.

One could even argue that if Microsoft would offer other choice of browser instead of imposing it's own browser , the other would have higher marketshare.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: From reality ...
by Nalle on Sun 18th Jan 2009 11:59 in reply to "RE: From reality ..."
Nalle Member since:
2005-07-06


Just removing previous posters boldface! It made the whole thread become bold from here.

Edited 2009-01-18 12:00 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: From reality ...
by UltraZelda64 on Sun 18th Jan 2009 16:27 in reply to "RE: From reality ..."
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

If MS had prevented rival browsers from competing, then how is it that Firefox was able to carve out a 20% marketshare for itself?

Firefox was free, and Mozilla did *loads* of marketing.

Word of mouth in the press also spread quickly, especially because at the same time one hole after another was found in IE, quickly giving it its well-earned, incredibly bad track record for security... making an alternative seem desirable. With Firefox being free (while for a time Opera wasn't) and much safer than IE, it was the obvious choice for the press to advocate. Meanwhile, Firefox's GUI was more like IE and Netscape at the time, and therefore more familiar to new users by default than Opera's.

Opera didn't fail to gain market share because it was a "suck-ass product" as you claim. It failed because it was:

-Not free, unlike IE. You had to pay for it.
-Not familiar. People knew Netscape and/or IE, and little to nothing about Opera. It had a different style of interface also, which complicated things more.
-Not as compatible. With so many sites designed it a pathetic way to only work on either Netscape or IE due to their market shares and ****ed up "standards," Opera didn't display near as many web pages properly (or at all).


While, to recap, Firefox took IE's market share by storm because it:

-Was at the right place at the right time; when IE's flaws were becoming well-known and abused more and more. The press and word of mouth quickly caught on.
-Had a familiar GUI for users of Netscape and IE.
-Was free, *and* more secure.
-Mozilla marketed the hell out of it, even spinning off a corporation to do the job.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: From reality ...
by slight on Sun 18th Jan 2009 19:09 in reply to "RE: From reality ..."
slight Member since:
2006-09-10

Before MS started bundling IE with Windows Netscape had the majority of the browser market. Once MS started bundling *their* browser with their OS the vast majority of people no longer had to bother making a choice about which browser they'd use, they just used the one installed by default, despite the fact that it was vastly inferior for a significant period of time.

The fact Firefox has managed to claw back 20% against an incumbent installed on the vast majority of computers by default just shows to go how far behind IE slipped during those 5 years or so where MS stopped bothering to develop it because they had essentially destroyed all the competition. It was only very recently when Firefox's market share started seriously encroaching on IE's share that MS actually bothered developing their browser again.

Reply Parent Score: 3