EU finds that Microsoft has failed to comply with its browser choice commit


Recommended Posts

Android is an open platform and Google doesn't force you to buy apps from the Google Play, unlike Microsoft which requires Metro apps to be distributed through the Windows Store. Google is being investigated by the EU for privacy policy issues and has been investigated by the EU. And Apple was investigated for warranty issues and should be investigated for the way it sells apps.

The reality is that the EU takes a much more active role in the market place to prevent abuse.

Technically the decision is out of Google's hands anyway, they provide a browser in Android's source but OEM's are in no way compelled to use it, they could probably bundle Opera Mobile or Firefox if they so wished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the US may have a more corruptible system, at least it is willing to look past a ridiculous regulation such as this.

However, unlike the US, EU seems to actually care about privacy laws (at least in terms of consumers and companies), and consumer protection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same old anti EU comments. So silly. How can you honestly believe such dribble.

Microsoft failed to comply, now they get a punishment. If they didn't EU wouldn't have to fine them. Why is that so wrong ?

The Microsoft apologists come out every time. If it slaughtered puppies, I'm sure they'd find an excuse not to blame Microsoft lol. With regards to the EU verdict, I'm in complete agreement with it. Microsoft flouted the law once again, and it's paying the penalty. I suppose it's used to getting away with breaking the law so often in America that it comes as a surprise when a government actually holds it to account.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This seems like the Lance Armstrong thread all over again. The big, mean Europeans picking on the poor hard done by US entities.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who knows, perhaps MS can be fined enough to get Greece and Spain out of default. As far as the USA, I simply took IE out of my task bar, and made Firefox my default browser - too much for our brothers in the EU?

Semper Fi,

Ray - The old Marine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Android is an open platform and Google doesn't force you to buy apps from the Google Play, unlike Microsoft which requires Metro apps to be distributed through the Windows Store. Google is being investigated by the EU for privacy policy issues and has been investigated by the EU. And Apple was investigated for warranty issues and should be investigated for the way it sells apps.

The reality is that the EU takes a much more active role in the market place to prevent abuse.

I agree with what you say here (although I prefer Microsoft's strategy of only allowing apps to be installed from the Store), but none of that has anything to do with my post, it seems (please correct me if I'm wrong). My post was referring specifically to the fact that Android comes with its own browser by default, and Google haven't been forced to display a ballot screen to users. I was comparing Google's browser-included-with-platform situation to Microsoft's. As far as I can tell, this browser issue has nothing to do with whether the platform is open or closed; OEMs can choose to install other browsers on Windows by default, if they wish.

Technically the decision is out of Google's hands anyway, they provide a browser in Android's source but OEM's are in no way compelled to use it, they could probably bundle Opera Mobile or Firefox if they so wished.

So could the OEMs that produce Windows devices :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So could the OEMs that produce Windows devices :)

Except it's very well known that Microsoft offer then financial incentives not to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do they have 90%+ of the market, convicted monoplist ?

No.

No, but they have the most market share, and it's pretty huge. How is it fair that Microsoft are picked on just because their product is that popular?

Google are being investigated for something else though. Does that make the EU a big meanie looking for money ?

Again, no.

I haven't ever suggested that is what the EU are. I am implying that they're being unfair. They should either force all companies who do this to force ballot screens on their users, or they should force no company to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who knows, perhaps MS can be fined enough to get Greece and Spain out of default.

Yeah and perhaps the money the U.S goverment seized from the legitimate MegaUpload service will be enough to wipe out its national debt, maybe... /s

As far as the USA, I simply took IE out of my task bar, and made Firefox my default browser - too much for our brothers in the EU?

IE shouldn't be installed in the first place.

Semper Fi,

Ray - The old Marine

Nunquam Fidelis,

Corvini - The young freedom fighter

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea was never to punish every company equally, it's to punish monopolistic behaviour. If you don't have a monopoly, you can't be punished for monopolistic behaviour... period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I despise Apple, they aren't a monopoly in the PC market, in fact they don't even come close to being one. Their behaviour in iOS however should be looked at in my opinion.

[. . .]

Microsoft shouldn't be picked on just because their products are this popular. All users have a choice and they're choosing to use Microsoft's products.

If you believe Microsoft should be picked on in this way just because Apple and Google don't have a chance, then Google should be picked on in regard to the smartphone market because it seems Microsoft don't have a chance there, due to Android. Of course, I don't agree with either of those positions, but one appears to contradict the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is forcing people to use Metro apps and in turn use only Microsoft store? Aren't you one of the vocal Metro haters and if yes, why do care if only Microsoft can sell metro apps?

Nothing is forcing you to use Metro apps but Microsoft is using its market position to unfairly influence the market and restrict consumer choice, just as it did with Internet Explorer. I'm not a "hater" but I am highly critical of the restrictions Microsoft has put in place, both in terms of distribution and in design implementation.

As for the EU, I do think it needs to be more consistent in its investigations and if anything I believe it needs to be stricter with the market. The recent financial collapse has demonstrated that the financial industry was woefully under-regulated. The US penchant for under-regulation / deregulation has been disastrous for consumers - we've seen: pink slime used in beef products; hormones and antibiotics used in cattle; broadband monopolies leading to massively inflated prices; unfair disconnection rates on mobile contracts; banks being able to flout the law and avoid any consequence, etc. And all because big business has so much power there that they're able to influence policy and pay-off any politician who stands in their way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except it's very well known that Microsoft offer then financial incentives not to.

I see nothing wrong with that. What do you deem wrong with that? The OEMs still have a choice. Microsoft aren't forcing them not to, they're just giving them money in order to try to convince them not to (if that's even true).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the meantime, it's completely fine for Apple to continue bundling their browser with their operating system, not being made to ask users to choose. Oh, and what's that? Google are likewise allowed to do that with Android, despite it having the most market share out of all smartphone operating systems? Oh, how fair.

In neither case are they monopolies. They both have a large share of the market, but not a monopoly.

It is all about leveraging a dominant position in one market to gain in another, not bundling per se. Microsoft used their monopoly in the OS market to get IE onto all computers. As users rarely look beyond what comes with their PC, this gave IE and unfair advantage over their competitors. This is against EU law and Microsoft were ordered to insert the ballot screen. The removal of it, accidental or not, violates that law.

Google are being investigated for a similar infraction (IIRC, using their search monopoly).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IE shouldn't be installed in the first place.

Intentionally cripple an OS by removing a feature that's been a standard in every OS for years? (Again ignoring the fact that you can replace it, it's free, etc etc.) Personally, I'm all for this idea. Remove IE from the install media. No need to have the inane ballot screen anymore, let the EU figure out how they're going to get online by themselves, why should MS be forced to market and distribute other companies products?

The idea was never to punish every company equally, it's to punish monopolistic behaviour. If you don't have a monopoly, you can't be punished for monopolistic behaviour... period.

And again, how is it a monopoly when the user has a choice to use a different OS and browser? Popular != monopoly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In neither case are they monopolies. They both have a large share of the market, but not a monopoly.

It is all about leveraging a dominant position in one market to gain in another, not bundling per se. Microsoft used their monopoly in the OS market to get IE onto all computers. As users rarely look beyond what comes with their PC, this gave IE and unfair advantage over their competitors. This is against EU law and Microsoft were ordered to insert the ballot screen. The removal of it, accidental or not, violates that law.

Google are being investigated for a similar infraction (IIRC, using their search monopoly).

I know that it is law, but I have problems with this law. I don't believe it's fair to target just companies who are monopolies, especially when it's the users' choices that have made them the monopoly. I believe that the rules should be the same for everyone and everything. If the EU are going to target Microsoft regarding just the browser, all companies should have to implement the ballot screen for browsers in all of their operating systems. It's just about what's fair, and forcing just Microsoft to do it, merely because users have made them a monopoly, seems very unfair to me. After all, it is the users that have made them a monopoly and the users continue to maintain that market share for Microsoft. Why punish just Microsoft for what the users have done?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with what you say here (although I prefer Microsoft's strategy of only allowing apps to be installed from the Store), but none of that has anything to do with my post, it seems (please correct me if I'm wrong). My post was referring specifically to the fact that Android comes with its own browser by default, and Google haven't been forced to display a ballot screen to users.

I apologise, as my post went a bit off on a tangent. The browser ballot was a corrective measure designed to undo the damage caused by Microsoft's anti-competitive behaviour in bundling IE with Windows - it was part of the settlement in addition to the fine. Android's default browser has always provided a way to change the default search engine in the options. However, I do think that Microsoft's competitors should also be required to implement the browser ballot so that everybody has to play by the same rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Intentionally cripple an OS by removing a feature that's been a standard in every OS for years?

(Again ignoring the fact that you can replace it, it's free, etc etc.) Personally, I'm all for this idea. Remove IE from the install media. No need to have the inane ballot screen anymore, let the EU figure out how they're going to get online by themselves

It's not necessary to installl IE to provide a ballot like screen which then downloads a browser package from a server. Any programmer with half a brain can code a simple file downloader using sockets. There's no reason to tie IE in with the OS except for the fact that Microsoft wants to use its dominant desktop OS monopoly to maintain browser marketshare so it can push Bing, and its other online services. A clear cut case of antitrust.

And again, how is it a monopoly when the user has a choice to use a different OS and browser? Popular != monopoly.

So consumers are given a choice over what OS and browser they want when they buy a PC from the store? A browser ballot is a choice, installing IE on every PC by default isn't. It relies on the fact that users either a) don't know about or how to install alternaties or b) take the path of least resistance and accept what ever's on there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the meantime, it's completely fine for Apple to continue bundling their browser with their operating system, not being made to ask users to choose. Oh, and what's that? Google are likewise allowed to do that with Android, despite it having the most market share out of all smartphone operating systems? Oh, how fair.

Apple OS X doesn't hold a 90% market share. The mobile space in its turn is heavily fragmented. Even though Google has a majority share they simply don't have a monopoly in any way, unlike Microsoft in the desktop PC market. You're comparing apples with oranges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not necessary to installl IE to provide a ballot like screen which then downloads a browser package from a server. Any programmer with half a brain can code a simple file downloader using sockets. There's no reason to tie IE in with the OS except for the fact that Microsoft wants to use its dominant desktop OS monopoly to maintain browser marketshare so it can push Bing, and its other online services. A clear cut case of antitrust.

You're ignoring one of the first questions IE asks after you install it.. which search do you want to use. So much for "clear" antitrust. How about going after the one that's actually got the near monopoly in the search arena, namely Google? I don't recall ever seeing a ballot screen on my old Androids.

So consumers are given a choice over what OS and browser they want when they buy a PC from the store? A browser ballot is a choice, installing IE on every PC by default isn't. It relies on the fact that users either a) don't know about or how to install alternaties or b) take the path of least resistance and accept what ever's on there.

Yes, it's a choice. That exact same choice that's being denied users of every f'ing other OS out there. Why is this so hard to grasp? If they want to force companies to offer choices.. fine, I can understand that, but it has to be fair, everybody should be required to do this. But if they only force that onto one manufacturer ignoring the rest? That's a tad biased.

Even though Google has a majority share they simply don't have a monopoly in any way, unlike Microsoft in the desktop market. Enjoy comparing apples with oranges much?

And again, monopoly implies choices being forced on users. I can go out and buy a desktop system with Windows, OSX, or Linux preinstalled. Wildly popular, yes. Monopoly, no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And again, monopoly implies choices being forced on users. I can go out and buy a desktop system with Windows, OSX, or Linux preinstalled. Wildly popular, yes. Monopoly, no.

Don't give me that nonsense. Microsoft to this very day holds a firm monopoly over the PC market. If only because just about every single PC ships with Windows by default. In that sense Windows is very much forced upon you since you can't buy the vast majority of computers without it. OS X is basically the one and only true exception, but it only applies to Mac. Linux simply not being a viable option for most.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't give me that nonsense.

What nonsense? 5 seconds on any search engine and I can show you a manufacturer that will happily sell you a system pre-loaded with Linux. Even some of the major names. Maybe most PC's ship with it as default as that's because that's where the money is? You know, catering to the people who are paying for the thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What nonsense? 5 seconds on any search engine and I can show you a manufacturer that will happily sell you a system pre-loaded with Linux. Even some of the major names. Maybe most PC's ship with it as default as that's because that's where the money is? You know, catering to the people who are paying for the thing?

In most cases their selection of Linux configurations is very limited, not to mention the fact Linux in itself just isn't a viable solution for many. Because of the latter it goes without saying most computers ship with Windows pre-installed and I have no objection to that. It doesn't mean however Microsoft should be able to do whatever they want unchecked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.