Microsoft alters settlement with EU over browser exclusivity

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Microsoft has modified its antitrust settlement with the European Union in response to complaints from other browser makers.



Microsoft's offer to give consumers a choice of browsers to comply with antitrust claims by the European Union has undergone several changes in response to concerns raised by competing browser developers.



According to a report by Bloomberg, the modified agreement offers Windows users a "ballot screen" that will randomly list the five top web browsers. Users would be given the option to select a browser that will then be downloaded from the Internet.



Concerns were raised by Opera, Google, and Mozilla over the planned ballot concept when it was first announced due to plans to have the browsers listed in alphabetical order. This would have placed Apple's Safari browser first. "More competition in the browser space will mean greater innovation on the Web and a better user experience for people everywhere," Google spokesman Bill Echikson reportedly said.



The European Union's antitrust claim against Microsoft stemmed from its belief that the inclusion of Internet Explorer in Windows was an abuse of Microsoft's stance in the market. The EU claimed that the widespread use of Internet Explorer forced outside developers and programmers to work towards optimizing their products exclusively for the Microsoft browser, therefore limiting the features available to potential users.



According to November numbers by Net Applications, Internet explorer has fallen in total market share to capture 63.62 percent of the market, followed by Firefox with 24.72 and Safari with 4.36 percent.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 64
    sheffsheff Posts: 1,407member
    This law suit is total BS, cause europe always had more people using firefox or opera then the US for example. Some countries (Germany I think) Had something like 50% Firefox users, so this law suit against MS is BS. At any rate at this point microsoft is becoming an underdog in just about everything except their OS and MS Office. I would say google should be the target of the next antitrust hearings, especially since they are buying up more and more ad services and dominating the market.
  • Reply 2 of 64
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    It isn't BS. Unlike in the US, in Europe the governments actually tend to be less influenced by lobbyists.



    Further, Microsoft undoubtedly was found guilty of abusing it Windows' operating system Monopoly to gain an advantage with it's web browser. It never would have the lead with web browsers if it didn't twist hardware manufacturers arms to install Explorer at the expense of Netscape. THe EU now wants Microsoft to level the field based on it's abusive history and let users choose what browser to have installed by default.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sheff View Post


    This law suit is total BS, cause europe always had more people using firefox or opera then the US for example. Some countries (Germany I think) Had something like 50% Firefox users, so this law suit against MS is BS. At any rate at this point microsoft is becoming an underdog in just about everything except their OS and MS Office. I would say google should be the target of the next antitrust hearings, especially since they are buying up more and more ad services and dominating the market.



  • Reply 3 of 64
    mactrippermactripper Posts: 1,328member
    This is a good thing.



    Instead of people being like trained monkeys and clicking the blue "E" for internet. They get to use different browsers and learn different ways of achieving the same result.



    Instead of web operators making their sites Windows IE only, like a lot of real estate software is set up, they will be forced to adhere to WWW3 standards.



    Same should go for Office type software, instead of Microsoft Office all the time, perhaps they will now learn how to use OpenOffice or other brands to achieve the same results.



    Files will become more inter-compatible with other softwares, a OpenOffice user can open a Office file and vice versa.





    This diversification will also reduce malware, people learn that if one browser doesn't work well they can use another quite easily. Right now the way it is people are scared not to use Internet Explorer or their computer won't work. It stems from the fact that IE was used in XP to upgrade the OS.



    This is good for Mac's because people learn and say "hey!, if I can use another browser, I can use another operating system!" and the ball just keeps on rolling.





    Now what Apple needs is a demo version of OS X that will run in a custom virtual machine for Windows. A Windows user can boot the OS X demo app and it will run OS X in a window and they can get used to that, even run a few programs to get used to the Mac operating system. Make it easy to switch.
  • Reply 4 of 64
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sheff View Post


    This law suit is total BS, cause europe always had more people using firefox or opera then the US for example. Some countries (Germany I think) Had something like 50% Firefox users, so this law suit against MS is BS. At any rate at this point microsoft is becoming an underdog in just about everything except their OS and MS Office. I would say google should be the target of the next antitrust hearings, especially since they are buying up more and more ad services and dominating the market.



    I agree with you. At this point, if someone can't get their act together enough to figure out "I want Firefox (or insert favorite browser here) so I am going to log on IE, download, install Firefox and set it as my default browser" they deserve whatever MSFT is giving them.



    These regulators should move along already......



    PS: I am not a fan on MSFT, by any stretch.
  • Reply 5 of 64
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sheff View Post


    At any rate at this point microsoft is becoming an underdog in just about everything except their OS and MS Office. I would say google should be the target of the next antitrust hearings, especially since they are buying up more and more ad services and dominating the market.



    I think if Microsoft had been broken up 10 years ago, each part would be in a better position than it is now.



    I don't mean a Windows company and an Office company - I mean if one company got the latest Office 2003 code and Windows ME, while the other got the latest Windows code and Office 2000/Works. The resulting evolution and competition between each other would have made it harder for other companies.



    Ah well, that is life.
  • Reply 6 of 64
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    I agree with you. At this point, if someone can't get their act together enough to figure out "I want Firefox (or insert favorite browser here) so I am going to log on IE, download, install Firefox and set it as my default browser" they deserve whatever MSFT is giving them.



    That's Foxfire, by the way.



    If you've ever installed Firefox on a senior citizen's computer, you know what I mean....
  • Reply 7 of 64
    yes hopefully the next step will be to force pc manufacturers to install open office
  • Reply 8 of 64
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bluedalmatian View Post


    yes hopefully the next step will be to force pc manufacturers to install open office



    Sounds terrible.



    I like open office but forcing PC makers to install anything is a bad idea, no matter who is doing the forcing.
  • Reply 9 of 64
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,757member
    Good.



    Anything to throw a wrench into the MS ignorance machine, as long as it's lawful.
  • Reply 10 of 64
    cmf2cmf2 Posts: 1,427member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    I agree with you. At this point, if someone can't get their act together enough to figure out "I want Firefox (or insert favorite browser here) so I am going to log on IE, download, install Firefox and set it as my default browser" they deserve whatever MSFT is giving them.



    These regulators should move along already......



    PS: I am not a fan on MSFT, by any stretch.



    Your argument falls apart at "I want Firefox". I don't think you realize how many people still don't know there is an alternative to internet explorer.
  • Reply 11 of 64
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sheff View Post


    This law suit is total BS, cause europe always had more people using firefox or opera then the US for example. Some countries (Germany I think) Had something like 50% Firefox users, so this law suit against MS is BS. At any rate at this point microsoft is becoming an underdog in just about everything except their OS and MS Office. I would say google should be the target of the next antitrust hearings, especially since they are buying up more and more ad services and dominating the market.



    It's perfectly legal to dominate a market. It's illegal to use that domination to restrain trade. That's why Microsoft has been hauled up on antitrust violations (in both the US and Europe) and Google has not. It only looks like BS to people who don't understand the basic purpose of antitrust laws.
  • Reply 12 of 64
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    It’s funny. This idea was mentioned long before the suit, including making it randomized.



    I wonder how they are going to ensure it’s truly random. It’s not an easy thing to do with a computer and any favoritism toward IE will likely make the news.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sheff View Post


    This law suit is total BS, cause europe always had more people using firefox or opera then the US for example. Some countries (Germany I think) Had something like 50% Firefox users, so this law suit against MS is BS. At any rate at this point microsoft is becoming an underdog in just about everything except their OS and MS Office. I would say google should be the target of the next antitrust hearings, especially since they are buying up more and more ad services and dominating the market.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    It isn't BS. Unlike in the US, in Europe the governments actually tend to be less influenced by lobbyists.



    Further, Microsoft undoubtedly was found guilty of abusing it Windows' operating system Monopoly to gain an advantage with it's web browser. It never would have the lead with web browsers if it didn't twist hardware manufacturers arms to install Explorer at the expense of Netscape. THe EU now wants Microsoft to level the field based on it's abusive history and let users choose what browser to have installed by default.



    Is it possible to agree with both of you? MS did abuse their monopoly position but this case was brought up well after Firefox and others had found a way to regain control. A decade ago this would have been a valid case. The US v. Mircosoft case was first brought up in 1998. So much for pro-MS lobbyists there.







    I think Gassée had a valid point...

    Quote:

    Jean-Louis Gassée, CEO of Be Inc. […] criticized the emphasis on the "packaging problem." He claimed […] incorporation with the operating system was due to consumer expectation to have a browser packaged with the operating system. For example, BeOS comes packaged with its web browser, NetPositive, and Mac OS X with Safari.



    Instead, he argued, Microsoft's true anticompetitive clout was in the rebates it offered to OEMs preventing other operating systems from getting a foothold in the market




    Sometimes I feel bad for people like Gassée who have good products but still can’t get a foothold. I wonder what Macs would be like today if BeOS was used and if Jobs never came back to Apple.
  • Reply 13 of 64
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post


    Your argument falls apart at "I want Firefox". I don't think you realize how many people still don't know there is an alternative to internet explorer.



    "I don?t need Firefox because I only use the Internet, that?s why I use Internet Explorer."
  • Reply 14 of 64
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bluedalmatian View Post


    yes hopefully the next step will be to force pc manufacturers to install open office



    Unless MS starting bundling MS Office with Windows for free there is no reason why that would happen. Now, OEMs could install it along with all their 3rd-party pay-for-placement crapware and their homegrown crapware, but that is different.
  • Reply 15 of 64
    The EU's sole objective was/is to extract money from Microsoft. IE was just a path used by the regulators to enter the gold mine (MSFT's cash assets.).
  • Reply 16 of 64
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Is it possible to agree with both of you? MS did abuse their monopoly position but this case was brought up well after Firefox and others had found a way to regain control. A decade ago this would have been a valid case. The US v. Mircosoft case was first brought up in 1998. So much for pro-MS obbyists there.



    Maybe. The EU is still on Microsoft's case because the EU competition laws are different, and more aggressive. They seem to look less at issues such as market share and more at barriers to competition. If a developer has to go through Microsoft to get their products seen, and Microsoft uses that position to advantage their products in competition, then its seems that's prima facie evidence of abuse, according to EU law. I believe this why EU regulators are so adamant about making choice explicit rather than something a consumer has to discover on their own. The hurdle is higher in the US.
  • Reply 17 of 64
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    If a developer has to go through Microsoft to get their products seen, and Microsoft uses that position to advantage their products in competition, then its seems that's prima facie evidence of abuse, according to EU law. I believe this why EU regulators are so adamant about making choice explicit rather than something a consumer has to discover on their own. The hurdle is higher in the US.



    If that is the case then why take it to court a decade after the US did when the internet and choice was less well known among consumers than it is now. To me, this is like the RIAA trying to argue as late as 2008 that copying your CD to your computer for playing or backup, and/or changing the audio format are violations and not permitted by fair use. They are both about a decade late to the party, but at least the EU actually got somewhere.
  • Reply 18 of 64
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post


    Your argument falls apart at "I want Firefox". I don't think you realize how many people still don't know there is an alternative to internet explorer.



    The fundamental role of antitrust law is to prevent consumers from getting gouged by monopolies and collusive firms, not to legislate against ignorance and stupidity.



    When it morphs into the latter -- which it seems to have, in the EU -- we have let the government intrude way too much into our lives and into the manner in which our businesses are run.
  • Reply 19 of 64
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    To me, this is like the RIAA trying to argue as late as 2008 that copying your CD to your computer for playing or backup, and/or changing the audio format are violations and not permitted by fair use.



    Spot on.
  • Reply 20 of 64
    I dint ie. I've used pcs for years, Thank God for Chrome, but ie is just so busy and all those noises. They have to be turned off. It's just silly really.





    You would think with the millions, no, billions, they could make a great computer. And for the love if God, pleas make a comuter that has something close to iLife v they have the money for crying out loud. How hard can it be.



    Peace





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


    This is a good thing.



    Instead of people being like trained monkeys and clicking the blue "E" for internet. They get to use different browsers and learn different ways of achieving the same result.



    Instead of web operators making their sites Windows IE only, like a lot of real estate software is set up, they will be forced to adhere to WWW3 standards.



    Same should go for Office type software, instead of Microsoft Office all the time, perhaps they will now learn how to use OpenOffice or other brands to achieve the same results.



    Files will become more inter-compatible with other softwares, a OpenOffice user can open a Office file and vice versa.





    This diversification will also reduce malware, people learn that if one browser doesn't work well they can use another quite easily. Right now the way it is people are scared not to use Internet Explorer or their computer won't work. It stems from the fact that IE was used in XP to upgrade the OS.



    This is good for Mac's because people learn and say "hey!, if I can use another browser, I can use another operating system!" and the ball just keeps on rolling.





    Now what Apple needs is a demo version of OS X that will run in a custom virtual machine for Windows. A Windows user can boot the OS X demo app and it will run OS X in a window and they can get used to that, even run a few programs to get used to the Mac operating system. Make it easy to switch.



Sign In or Register to comment.