Three rivals of Microsoft's Internet Explorer web browser are seeking last minute changes to a proposal, that would see new users of Windows presented with a ballot screen of the top five browsers. Rivals believe that the current ballot screen proposal still gives Internet Explorer an unfair advantage.After a complaint from the makers of the Opera web browser, the European Commission decided in January that Microsoft's inclusion of Internet Explorer in Windows constituted an abuse of their dominant market position. In October, the Redmond-based company proposed a so-called browser "ballot screen", which would display a list of the top five browsers to consumers when they boot a new computer for the first time.
The commission has asked Microsoft's rivals, who still appear to be unhappy with the proposal, to comment on the company's offer by Monday.
Oslo-based Opera believes that the ballot should be displayed on a screen that does not contain the Microsoft logo. "It would be like having an election ballot where the name or logo of one candidate is displayed separately, prominently up in the corner of the ballot," said Mr. Lie, chief technology officer at Opera. "You wouldn't want that."
Opera also want Microsoft to prevent Windows from displaying the standard security warnings that occur when users download software from the Internet.
Mozilla, the creators of Firefox, are concerned about the ballot screen's design. Displayed within an Internet Explorer window, the screen will list the five most popular browsers in alphabetical order from left to right, giving first spot to Apple's Safari. Jenny Boriss, a Mozilla designer, criticized the display in a post on October 16th, writing, "Windows users presented with the current design will tend to make only two choices: Internet Explorer because they are familiar with it, or Safari because it is the first item." She went on to suggest that the browsers be displayed randomly.
Mr. Lie has said Google, Mozilla and Opera will send separate letters to the commission, detailing their requests for changes.
European competition commissioner, Neelie Kroes, has said she will take Microsoft to court should they fail to agree to a fair settlement. However, Mrs. Kroes, who is likely to step down at the end of the year, has said she would prefer to settle open cases before leaving.
According to research firm Net Applications, Internet Explorer current has a 67 percent share of the browser market, following by Firefox with 24 percent. Apple's Safari has 4.4 percent, Google's Chrome 3.5 percent and Opera just 2 percent.
Apple shops forced to offer Windows PC's? General Motors forced to display Ford logos as well as their own on cars?
Windows is the only (commercial) operating system forced to do this, Apple aren't and neither are the supported versions of Linux flavours that cost money.
Safari also comes with OS X, but no-one is complaining there!
Apple shops forced to offer Windows PC's? General Motors forced to display Ford logos as well as their own on cars?
Windows is the only (commercial) operating system forced to do this, Apple aren't and neither are the supported versions of Linux flavours that cost money.
Safari also comes with OS X, but no-one is complaining there!
oh just wait, someone will say "BUT MICROSOFT IS A MONOPOLY!"
Its a special privilage for Market leaders to make consessions to its less capable competitors. Its simple, Apple is not a market leader so they still have complete control over their products. When you become a marketleader everyone of their competitors have the right to complain and if your complaining to the EU you typically get your way.
MS has technically not been a monopoly by definition for years now, increased competition, vast drops in IE and WMP market share... they are under close scrutiny of multiple governments and their actions are watched closely, and competition has drastically increased
oh noes, someone spoke the truth
on a sidenote
The only company making a reasonable demand for once is Opera, maybe their whine n complain PR machine proved itself to be a failure
Or maybe they should spend some of their own money promoting their products so that they're not outdone by brand new browsers such as Chrome eh?
Its a special privilage for Market leaders to make consessions to its less capable competitors. Its simple, Apple is not a market leader so they still have complete control over their products. When you become a marketleader everyone of their competitors have the right to complain and if your complaining to the EU you typically get your way.
iPhone and iPod arn't market leaders huh? they bundle Apple browser and media players... and Apple pretty much forces you to have them...
If this was a true monopoly in the very sense of the word, we'd all be using nothing but MS software for everything. That's just not the case.
As long as there is no ballot screen agreement between those whiners, MS will continue to sell their OS without ballot, just as it is. When they *finally* agree on what to do, then something will happen.
Its a special privilage for Market leaders to make consessions to its less capable competitors. Its simple, Apple is not a market leader so they still have complete control over their products. When you become a marketleader everyone of their competitors have the right to complain and if your complaining to the EU you typically get your way.
iPhone and iPod arn't market leaders huh? they bundle Apple browser and media players... and Apple pretty much forces you to have them...
Safari isn't a threat, but iTunes locked to iPod and iPhone are going to be a Monopoly target some day. Especially if Apple continues to force all other players out of there and continues to earn a larger market share.
I'm sure there are some online stores and music players that are eyeing Apple up for a Monopoly case.
Opera has a done a wonderful job getting free advertising and having their name dropped all over the place with this effort though. Kudos to them on the creative marketing campaign. I still won't load it though. Chrome is starting to look pretty tempting for a default.
So Google needs to provide a link to Bing as well.
on a sidenote
The only company making a reasonable demand for once is Opera, maybe their whine n complain PR machine proved itself to be a failure
Or maybe they should spend some of their own money promoting their products so that they're not outdone by brand new browsers such as Chrome eh?
Yeah, always have to snipe at them huh...
Danger will robinson!.. Here come the inanely unrelated analogies...
Unfortunately everyone here already knows, but some adamantly continue to repeat the same platitudinal mantra of [i]"But what about Apple, What about Google, What about space weetos..."[/b].
Isn't it because Microsoft offers the best product available? Why penalise a company for offering good products? If other companies did the same then we would have much more competition. There is a choice out there, it's simply up to the consumer to choose a product what suits them.
Apple stores already offer Windows PC's. They're called MACS!
It's not anymore
Apple shops forced to offer Windows PC's? General Motors forced to display Ford logos as well as their own on cars?
Windows is the only (commercial) operating system forced to do this, Apple aren't and neither are the supported versions of Linux flavours that cost money.
Safari also comes with OS X, but no-one is complaining there!
I'm a bit surprised that someone with a user id of 2 manages to know so little about things he talks about.
Apparently Neobond doesn't think Microsoft should have to face the consequences of breaking the law.
Microsoft is the only OS forced to do this by the EC because Microsoft is the only one who broke the law.
This is pretty basic stuff. I can't believe someone didn't understand this basic stuff by now.
Ignorance is bliss. (:
Agreed. IE was developed for the Apple platform from '96 to '03, and was the default browser on MacOS and OS X for the final five years of development.
No but seriously I think opera should start to get a life, or change their company name to AAOpera. This way they would be first on the ballot screen.
Uh, no. It didn't. They didn't even have equal market share until around 98.
Yeah, "randomly", like Firefox first? This has really crossed a line over the last few years from obnoxious to absurd. You can't win there apparently.
"Opera also want Microsoft to prevent Windows from displaying the standard security warnings that occur when users download software from the Internet."
so MS can't even do security now? seriosuly wtf is up with that?
and the guys name is Mr. Lie? *LOL*
I personally think Apple is going down the same path MS did, everything is bundled with OSX anymore (yes bundled, not forced, bundled is the key word here) so people who just want it to work use iPhoto, iTunes, Quicktime, Safari... yeah kinda hindering competition there too wouldnt you think? If MS was yelled at for bundleing media player (which um it has had there since windows 3.1) why is Apple allowed to do the same thing under the guise of "were not a monoploy so its ok for us, but not for you, but then we will make fun of you for not having it"
iPhone and iPod are market leaders, and they bundle safari, and iTunes
No the Gov'ts only care when Opera, Apple, Mozilla, [insert whiny company here] start crying about how unfair thier life is. Honestly I am sick and tired of hearing about this browser ballot/war crap.
Opera has its uses, mostly dust collection for me. IE is used when some website is written ONLY for IE (some of the Govt sites I visit). Safari, only on my touch, Firefox for everything. Someone will say that I am retarded, but each person has thier own choice of browser. Go get the bloody browser you want to run and run it. My parents don't need sanything but IE. FF is to confusing for them.
Apple is getting away wiht the same crap that MS is getting hammered for, regardless of what you say. Where are my stripped down versions of OSX? I would say that my mac was bundled with the same things I expect in an OS, whether Windows, Linux, or Mac. Either all OSes must offer a ballot screen for a browser, media player, picture editor, movie player, mail program, contact manager, mindless games option, and every other option, or no one has to. Yes that would be impossible to do........... and ornerous on the end user, but lets be fair to these mega companies that work easy for our money.
what was so amazing about that whole court thing, was that other AV companies fully worked around the patchguard but somehow the courts felt it was still unfair
I'm hoping that the EU will make a rational decision by ignoring Opera and accepting the listings in alphabetical order, it's the fairest method of doing it from what I can see.
Wonder if Opera are going to change their name to A-Opera or something similar to get to the front of the list?
Of course people are going to use Internet Explorer if they are familiar with it cos they know it works for them! The standard user will simply choose IE as they are used to it! I use Firefox but what she has said there is completely out of order!
Anyways, anyone who gets windows with a new PC will have the missing apps installed by the OEM, in the end you get everything.
Yeah but the whole working out of the box with whatever brand of hardware I choose is worth a lot. Can't say that for OSX or any Linux distro I've yet tried. I don't know what your definition of "cool" is but simplicity and compatibility is worth a lot to most people. Easily worth the $99 I spent on Windows.
also Media Center is pretty cool
They got to be kidding. Do they want MS to disable all security too, why don't they ask to have their engineers make Windows instead. This is pushing it, no matter what the solution they don't seem satisfied maybe they simply want Windows banned from EU.
Why bite the hand that feeds you, make your browser better, then let the consumer make a choice.
Anything Kroes decides now can be fought as an illegal act because officially she's no longer a commissioner.
1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Compare duopoly, oligopoly.
2. an exclusive privilege to carry on a business, traffic, or service, granted by a government.
3. the exclusive possession or control of something.
4. something that is the subject of such control, as a commodity or service.
5. a company or group that has such control.
6. the market condition that exists when there is only one seller.
I don't see Microsoft as meeting any of the conditions above. They have exclusive control over their own product (Windows) but as a consumer you are not forced in any way to use Windows as your OS or IE as your browser. They are the market leader in the OS and browser world and as such should be held to a standard of not being anti-competetive i.e. not locking out competition. There are so many options available to us as PC users, whether you use Windows or not, I can't see how anyone can honestly claim that MS is a monopoly. Market leader, yes. Monopoly, no.
Having a market share greater than 30%
I see MS meeting that standard.
I look forward to the day APPL will allow third parties to sync flawlessly witht their "media-pods"...afterall we can call them a monopoly in the PMP market? No?
"Approximately 40 million mobile phones have shipped with Opera pre-installed"
And to top it all off, they still charge for the smartphone version which isn't bundled.
I believe controlling a market, that is having a controlling share is the definition of a monopoly. But don't forgot that MS has a history of abusing that controlling share to penetrate other markets, such as the online search, indirectly via the browser market.
Wrong. You've completely misinterpreted (3). It's referring to possession or control of a resource. The market is not a resource that Microsoft has exclusive access to.
I'm sure you've heard the popular example before: owning the only oasis in a desert and grossly overcharging for a drink of water.
A ballot screen with no IE at all. Or with no IE picture and the text about IE is white on white.
No?
Mozilla have managed to gain a substantial portion of the browser market,so it MUST be that your software sucks. People even want to use Google Chrome over Opera
Actually in some european countries Opera has a higher marketshare than IE
RTFA
In fact, I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how web browsers are a market. None of them cost anything. It's a bunch of freeware. I've never heard of competition between freebies before.
Frankly, the web browser has become a standard element of the operating system, just as basic as a program manager or terminal. So could someone please tell me--please--how this is ANY different from if the developers of Total Commander decided to approach the EU and complain about Windows Explorer being the default file manager?
I'm imagining them arguing about how Microsoft unfairly promotes explorer.exe by requiring them to use it to navigate to wherever Total Commander is downloaded.
It costs money.
And it's not necessarily bad. But Microsoft made it bad because they at the same time made a conscious effort to prevent other browsers from being used by bullying OEMs, using Windows-proprietary stuff in IE, etc.
The browser ballot screen should not be displayed in HTML, it should be a stand-alone app that can be run with NO browser installed on the system.
The browser ballot screen should not be displayed in HTML, it should be a stand-alone app that can be run with NO browser installed on the system.
I completely agree. It's like this ridiculous crap with how I have to use the Windows task bar in order to get to the commands necessary to install and set to default a different shell program if I want to use one. Why should Microsoft be allowed to let the Start menu influence my choice of shell before I have an opportunity to see all the different options out there?
I didn't even know about Mac-style GUI conversion kits for Windows XP until years after the OS's release! This is horribly unfair, not only to the taskbar's competition, but also to the hobbyist programmers out there who've made these alternate shells for free. Why is Microsoft trying to stifle creativity?
Is it really the point of the settlement? So, now MS must undertake a huge scientific research to study which ballot layout results in the most impartial distribution? And how would you define impartiality? What are your Bayesian priors going to be? If 3 out of 4 people choose IE, and at the same time IE has 75% market share - is it partial or impartial according to you?
Don't overcomplicate, MS gave a reasonable choice to consumers with the ballot screen.
@Max1978: It's not really up to MS to decide their own punishment. The government must serve its citizens, not corporations.
Last edited by HalcyonX12 on 08 Nov 2009 - 00:11
You are giving Americans a bad name with your ignorance.
FYI: The US has the exact same antitrust laws as Europe:
http://www.justice.gov/atr/
Yes, even the Republicans realize that you can't have a market without laws. Laws are there to protect the free market.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.