Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 6th Mar 2013 11:54 UTC
Legal "The European Commission has imposed a EUR 561 million fine on Microsoft for failing to comply with its commitments to offer users a browser choice screen enabling them to easily choose their preferred web browser. In 2009, the Commission had made these commitments legally binding on Microsoft until 2014. In today's decision, the Commission finds that Microsoft failed to roll out the browser choice screen with its Windows 7 Service Pack 1 from May 2011 until July 2012. 15 million Windows users in the EU therefore did not see the choice screen during this period. Microsoft has acknowledged that the choice screen was not displayed during that time." Burn.
Thread beginning with comment 554505
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Typical EU
by JAlexoid on Thu 7th Mar 2013 16:44 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Typical EU"
JAlexoid
Member since:
2009-05-19

But pluh-ease, this internet browser affair is so childish it leaves me puzzled. Users just have to seek for another web browser if the one provided with does not suit their tastes, many have done by themselves. Why EU should force Microsoft to do so ?


It's childish because "someone" has not read the reasoning behind this all. It's bundling, pure and simple. It's illegal, when it hurts market competition. By being the default, users are lead to believe that it's the only way to experience the web. If it weren't for Google, IE would still be there at 60%. The market forces have failed that market, because Microsoft's OS is not substitutable.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[5]: Typical EU
by Kochise on Thu 7th Mar 2013 17:48 in reply to "RE[4]: Typical EU"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Still, they could use Google through IE to search for another web browser. Millions of people have made that way to switch to Firefox, Safari, Opera and so on, without the help of the EU.

And if an operating system should just consist in a bunch of APIs and just a bundled file explorer, sorry, but this is as gross as returning in the good ol' DOS days with DosShell.

That would render "Windows" rather useless and pretty expensive for the offering. Please don't vote me down on anger, just think about what I just wrote down.

Kochise

Edited 2013-03-07 17:50 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Typical EU
by JAlexoid on Thu 7th Mar 2013 22:23 in reply to "RE[5]: Typical EU"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Still, they could use Google through IE to search for another web browser. Millions of people have made that way to switch to Firefox, Safari, Opera and so on, without the help of the EU.

Firefox stalled at 30%, while Chrome was pushed by Google. If web search wasn't associated with Google who pushed Firefox and then Chrome, we would still have IE as the dominant browser(that much, I'm absolutely sure about). No attempts at marketing their browser helped Opera in countries where Windows is largely legal(Russia is the counterexample).
That meant one thing only - Microsoft's dominance in desktop OS market, that got them the top spot in the browser market, kept IE as the top browser.
If you read the whole 2004 decision, upheld by the court in full, you'll see that the position is very much reasonable.(Granted, you have enough knowledge of macroeconomics)

And if an operating system should just consist in a bunch of APIs and just a bundled file explorer, sorry, but this is as gross as returning in the good ol' DOS days with DosShell.

That would render "Windows" rather useless and pretty expensive for the offering. Please don't vote me down on anger, just think about what I just wrote down.

Keep in mind that I did not address that part of the comment, because even the EU competition commission agrees that a browser is needed.

Reply Parent Score: 3