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 554558
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Typical EU
by JAlexoid on Thu 7th Mar 2013 22:23 UTC 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

RE[7]: Typical EU
by Kochise on Fri 8th Mar 2013 07:45 in reply to "RE[6]: Typical EU"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

What baffles me is how much you disregard corporate IT policies about installing other browser than IE. How many firms dared to use something else than IE/outlook ? Bam, first half of the problem answered. Then the average consumer : why would they use Firefox or Opera if the sites they are browsing are not "IE compatible" thus are rendered very grossly ? Bam, second half of the problem answered.

The W3C is slow as hell into delivering solid, consistent and long lasting web standards so, of course, Microsoft could play with the specs until further notice. But it's the webmasters and web designers to stick to the standard and somewhat "force" Microsoft for compliance.

I don't see where IE is a problem : it is known to be flawed, bugged, toolbared, whatever, but it's ok, people still love it. When people gets fed up of IE, they seek for some other alternatives. When people gets fed up of Windows, they seek for another operating system.

In what a web browser is more important than reading PDF or browsing our pictures portfolio ? Would the EU impose a carousel to select between Adobe Reader/Foxit Reader/..., or ACDSee/Irfanview/..., etc... so that every part of the Windows operating system could be finely tuned according to the user's needs and feeling ?

The EU commission should focus on OEM/UEFI and interoperability (playing BR discs with other video player than the few "licensed") and remove some useless software patents. THAT would be interesting, not the stuff happening behind the users' back about advertising revenue using this or that browser and imposing this or that search engine.

Because everything lies there : advertising revenue, NOT users' choice over one web browser or another.

Kochise

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: Typical EU
by JAlexoid on Sat 9th Mar 2013 07:24 in reply to "RE[7]: Typical EU"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Would the EU impose a carousel to select between Adobe Reader/Foxit Reader/..., or ACDSee/Irfanview/..., etc... so that every part of the Windows operating system could be finely tuned according to the user's needs and feeling ?


You are really failing to understand the main premise - Microsoft's Windows + IE were practically hurting the competitive market. They illegally obtained and held onto a market, by using dominance in another market.
If they were to include a PDF reader, that would be a whole separate issue. Investigated separately and checked if that particular action has hurt competition in an unfair way.(Most likely PDF reader will have no issues)

Your right to choose is irrelevant, your ability however is at stake here. Forcing to advertise competitors' product isn't an ordinary thing to be imposed. It's a form of penance instead of a fine. So don't expect a ballot box to be there for everything or anything else.

Reply Parent Score: 2