Mozilla to join EU suit against Microsoft

On Monday, European Union(EU) granted Mozilla, the right to join its antitrust case against Microsoft. Mozilla has been granted an interested third party status which allows it to submit arguments, to see the confidential statement of objections the EU sent to Microsoft last month, and to participate in a face-to-face hearing if Microsoft requests one.

Last month European Union said its preliminary view was that Microsoft had violated the European law by bundling Internet Explorer with Windows, based on a complaint by Opera, the outcome of which may be EU forcing Microsoft to bundle Firefox and other browsers with Windows. Opera later suggested that one of the possible remedies to revive browser competition would be to ship an European edition of Windows operating system without a browser and users given a choice of browsers either during at the install or via Windows Update after the installation.

Mitchell Baker, Mozilla Foundation Chairperson & CEO said in her blog on Friday that she supported the EU's preliminary view and is ready to participate in the European antitrust proceedings. She said that Firefox had been able to build significant market share despite the bundling of Internet Explorer and Windows.

"the damage Microsoft has done to competition, innovation and the pace of the Web development itself is both glaring and ongoing. There are separate questions of whether there is a good remedy, and what that remedy might be. Mozilla Firefox has made a crack in the Microsoft browser monopoly. But even so, hundreds of millions of people use old versions of IE, often without knowing what a browser is or that they have any choice in the quality of their experience. This makes it very difficult to bring innovation, choice or improved user experience to vast parts of the Internet. She concluded by offering the EU Mozilla's expertise as it considers what an effective remedy would entail"

In an interview with PC Pro, Firefox architect Mike Connor said that Mozilla is still considering its position in the light of the ruling, but that he wouldn't be in favour of Firefox being bundled with Windows. He also said Opera is asserting something that's provably false that bundling the browser leading to market share.

"Opera's asserting something that's provably false. It's asserting that bundling leads to market share. I don't know how you can make the claim with a straight face. As people become aware there's an alternative, you don't end up in that [monopoly] situation. You have to be perceptibly better [than Internet Explorer]"

Mike also added that he was "kind of worried" about Firefox achieving the monopolistic status of Internet Explorer.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Review: dreamGEAR PS3 Shadow Wireless Controller

Next Story

UK teens 13-15 view over 86 hours of online porn a year

99 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Can't blame them. They lost the unconditional support of their Sugar daddy Google. Chrome will eat into FF faster than IE. They also are equal opportunity in that they went after Apple calling them Malware when they started bundling Safari with iTunes on Windows.

I think Firefox's intentions are pretty clear. Firefox is saying that in the past, Internet Explorer's lack of standards and massive market share was responsible for hurting innovation and competition within the browser market. IE's great power came with great responsiblity, and that responsibility was grossly ignored by Microsoft.

However, times have changed. IE doesn't control the broswer market anymore, and Microsoft is trying to turn their massive flagship browser to be on course with web standards. Firefox understands that, and simply wants Microsoft to stay the course. Firefox does not want their browser forced down other users throats; they are clearly attacking Opera for using the EU to punish Microsoft for the mistakes and shortcomings of Opera themselves. Google's Chrome even surpassed Opera in market share, in a matter of months(and they are still in BETA). Is Opera going to have the EU sue google next?

Even if Opera does succeed in having the money-grubbing EU force Microsoft to include additional browsers at the point of installation. who is to say that Opera will be on that list? You'd be first to see Safari on that list, before Opera ever has a chance.

1) Install Vista
2) Open IE
3) http://www.firefox.com
4) Download

I know that people are dumb, but, it's not that difficult.

Opera is simply hurt because they have a sub-par browser that no one wants to use.

Let's see more QQ, Opera.

So do you think notepad.exe and calc.exe are anti-competitive, simply because Grandma doesn't know(or care) about using an alternative?

I hope not.

What Microsoft should be doing is providing options during the install. A choice of browsers is ideal but of course then they have to support them. It will also be a support nightmare for other companies. Beyond that I think that it should be optional to install items like WMP, Windows Messenger, and Outlook Express/Windows Mail. Yes I do know that Windows 7 does not come with a mail client...

That's fine as long as the EU forces Apple to remove Safari, iTunes, and QuickTime from OSX. They hurt competing technologies too, including Firefox, Opera, and Microsoft's Office. In fact, they should be barred from distributing iLife with new Macs and let people choose what suite they want.

Do some research. No one forces anyone to use WMP, Messenger, Outlook, IE. Users always have a choice. If they are lacking the knowledge of what a browser is or how to try a different one they can blame themselves, not Microsoft.

time to start coding my own browser... maybe add some adware to get some $$$ od it and sue as well...
wow...
$$$ of one browser X the sale number of windows = WHOAW!

ok... where's my copy of Visual Studio again? :D

...

ridiculous

edit: please note: this is meant metaphorically

despite the complaints from developer community against Internet exploere non-standards compliance, MS is going on and on maintaing a few standard on their browser. It is clear that they want to create their own standard on the web. The recent release of IE8 rc1 just prove this truth.
If MS is nog supoorting web standard - this is just the begining. More will come to MS.

Personally I suggest that developer should make some tweak and make their webpage a little squirky in the IE and suggest user to download a standard compliant browser from the web.

I will from now on will show an statistics in my every webpage "how much your browser supports web standard"
and request them to " dont hurt the web"

tareqf1 said,
despite the complaints from developer community against Internet exploere non-standards compliance, MS is going on and on maintaing a few standard on their browser. It is clear that they want to create their own standard on the web. The recent release of IE8 rc1 just prove this truth.
If MS is nog supoorting web standard - this is just the begining. More will come to MS.

Personally I suggest that developer should make some tweak and make their webpage a little squirky in the IE and suggest user to download a standard compliant browser from the web.

I will from now on will show an statistics in my every webpage "how much your browser supports web standard"
and request them to " dont hurt the web"


Web standards are so retarded that they limit you to do a lot of things.

i hate the eu. first they wants us to convert to imperial units, then change pounds to euros. Now they even decide which software we should use. I say MS should stop selling products in the EU for a while, and see how they like that.

I think this debate needs to happen. It can't just be swept under the carpet any longer. My personal feelings are that bundling other web browsers or removing Internet Explorer from Windows altogether aren't idea solutions, and in that respect I don't pretend to offer a better one either. With that said though it's very difficult to argue that Microsoft don't have the superior distribution channel for their product. Some people seem to be forgetting that there are people who make their livings (read: putting food on the table) building other web browsers.

If all the EU, Opera and Mozilla wading in achieves is to spark a wider debate then great, because it needs to happen. Saying Microsoft should be able to do what they want (like pulling out of the EU), or that Apple should be subject to the same treatment or even that the EU are just doing this for money just isn't a reasonable answer any more.

Nobody forces you to use IE. Firefox has a pretty big Windows install base for an add-on browser you have to download. Apple is guilty of the exact same thing and worse. They bundle their browser with their OS, shove it with updates for their Windows software, and tie iPods, iTunes, their App and Music stores, and their OS all together. They should all be subject to the same treatment. Laws are not supposed to apply to one entity more than another.

ziadoz said,
Pardon me if I don't take your opinion too seriously, but your first reaction to this article was to "permanently remove Firefox".


No, my first reaction was to read the Mozilla blog article. My second was to post my intent here. My third action was to uninstall Firefox.

It's still over the top any way you look at it. Especially when you consider Mozilla are arguing *against* the very thing you seem to be angry at Opera and the EU for suggesting.

This lawsuit is frivolous BS. I don't understand how somebody could sue a company for providing a program that is essential to browse the internet. How else could companies like Opera or Mozilla expect to sell/distribute their product? Stupid move by the EU, Opera, and Mozilla.

also, if the browsers arent making any headway in the market, it could be due to THAT NO BROWSER ADVERTISES! if you only expect to get around by word of mouth, don't expect to get around too far. IE gets around because MS makes the OS and can choose what they want on THEIR software. If Mozilla or Opera want more people to use their browser, they need to advertise. They really think that some joe schmoe is going to install windows, not knowing what firefox or opera is, and install those instead of IE?? If they dont know and havent tried it by now, they most likely wont switch without knowing what they are getting into.
EU is stupid. MS, pull out of the market over there for a bit. Show the fools what its like in a world without windows.

I think they should just pull out, or start selling it by pieces.
first by the core, then extra for the GUI, then extra for networking, and so on.
the EU get thier wish that nothing is tied into the os and the customers get screwed. I think thats what they are tring to do.

I'm all for this. I seem to be a minority.
Give people the choice of what browser during install. Problem solved.
Microsoft is a monopoly. And for those who will argue it is not, fine. Either way, it's a majority by a longshot.

I find this funny though:

Mike also added that he was "kind of worried" about Firefox achieving the monopolistic status of Internet Explorer.

:laugh: Yeah, ok.

I think Apple is paying the EU. I don't see the EU going after Apple at all. I think every operating system shouldn't be allowed with any software on it when you get it, when you turn it on for the first time you should have to pick what media player, what browser, what messenger etc. - NOT!

The EU is retarded, lucky I live in Canada with DEMOCRACY!

Keep this in the EU, don't screw the rest of us over for this. They can get a screwed up version of Windows if they want to.

Wait wait wait, why doesn't Microsoft just make it one of those selectable features when you're installing Windows? So that you can choice between a bunch of internet browsers if you want before you even install Windows, that way it doesn't bulk the system. Or is that what the EC is going for?

Because then Microsoft would be expected to keep track of and maintain software they do not make, support, or profit off of.

Exploit found in Firefox? Microsoft will have to patch the version that comes with the OS at once, or else risk millions and millions of people being at risk. And as there would be no other way of accessing the internet if the EU has it's way, it'd have to be done through a non-browser based method of patching.

Woo for third party support to Windows Update, opening a potential flurry of security holes and dangers.

Rolith said,
Woo for third party support to Windows Update, opening a potential flurry of security holes and dangers.

I don't believe that they would be the ones responsible for this. Firefox and other browsers have built-in updating.

splur said,
Keep this in the EU, don't screw the rest of us over for this. They can get a screwed up version of Windows if they want to.

The EU has already forced "N" versions of Windows XP & Vista that have Windows Media Player removed. Whenever you try and play any media it comes up with a message saying that you can download a media player from the internet.
Strangely no-one buys it. The EU then went after MS again saying that they "weren't promoting it enough as a product" - they really think people aren't buying it because they don't want it, they think it's because there aren't ads for it!

Hi,

As per this quote from the EU site:

In the SO, the Commission sets out evidence and outlines its preliminary conclusion that Microsoft's tying of Internet Explorer to the Windows operating system harms competition between web browsers, undermines product innovation and ultimately reduces consumer choice.

Therefore I see that bundling any browser, whether it be a Microsoft browser, Firefox, Opera or Chrome would still be forcing a choice upon the end-user.

I live in the UK, part of the EU, and this is getting absolutely rediculous.

Seriously, they offer the browser for a better out-of-box experience.

Also, yes it might hard competition between browsers, but then it is going to have a negative impact on IE, if you force the user to have a different browser.

The EU is just far too much of a nanny culture.

I fpeople want a different browser, let them decide, and let them download, install and use it. Just let Microsoft budle their own browsers. If not then the EU need to start taking further action against all others like Apple for bundling their OS's with browsers.

What is with the EU and their grudge against Microsoft? The way I see it, it's Microsoft's OS and not the EU's. They should do whatever they feel is "acceptable by law". And Mozilla? I thought they were cool with Microsoft. The Internet Explorer team congratulated them with a cake. Okay, maybe that's not enough to gain the "respect" of an open source organization. Oh, to hell with the EU.

What is with the EU and their grudge against Microsoft?

Simple. They are low on funds and want to drain it from a successful American company.

I think all Microsoft has to do is promise to pass a certain test by the next release of IE. There should be a deadline set, if that's what it takes to make the EU happy. The current method is just making them look like fools.

Tha Bloo Monkee said,
What test? What does this have to do with browser market shares?

Because IE is included in every Windows install and most users don't know any better. They just use what is included.

This is getting retarded. Its not like it isnt free to download all of those browsers, so I dont see the point of the bitching. This is exactly why they need to charge EU all out the ass for windows.

Sorry i totally not understand why everyone is angry with this....
Mozilla is merely point out a fact, they never said IE or Firefox should / should not be bundled with Windows ( in fact they are against it )

They are merely pointing out how IE has hurt the Web previously.

all web developers have to do is stop supporting IE6 and below, that otta make change happen sooner rather than later ... stating 'please download and use Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Safari in order to better view this page' MS isn't stopping them

artfuldodga said,
all web developers have to do is stop supporting IE6 and below, that otta make change happen sooner rather than later ... stating 'please download and use Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Safari in order to better view this page' MS isn't stopping them

Do you remember why web developers started making special versions of their webpages for IE6, if they weren't flat-out supporting IE6 at the expense of other browsers? It was because the vast majority of people were using Internet Explorer (and the vast majority of people use Windows - surprising correlation?), and it's very likely that when pages didn't work properly in their browser they complained to the website administrators or the companies who ran them. That's a lot of complaints from a lot of people who either would not understand or would not care if the problems were Internet Explorer's fault instead of the webpage coder's. In order to keep people satisfied, developing for IE6 specifically was the best course of action.

These days it's easy to say that the situation is different: we take it for granted that people know that browsers like Firefox exist and that Internet Explorer isn't their only option. It's not so cheap to redevelop webpages (meaning that the transition from IE6-specific sites to ones that follow web standards may take some time), and furthermore it isn't cheap or advisable to suddenly take on loads of customer complaints - regardless of whether they know that Firefox exists. At the very least, if all of the browsers are on their system then the tech support people can tell them to just use another browser that's already included on their computer.

This is a big issue, but if you don't understand why it's such a big deal that we can use what ever browser we want these days or why browsers started catering to IE6 in the first place then you probably won't think so. It may seem unfair to Microsoft, but Microsoft commands a lot of marketshare, and thus it needs to be extremely careful about what it does due to its market impact. In many ways, you could say that by blatently ignoring web standards they brought this upon themselves.

those admins , web developers didn't have to cave, they could of said straight up, you need to update your browser, and keep up to date, problem solved

Ledgem - You make a fairly good argument but the problem that the EU could find itself in is the problem that the U.S. Government tries to avoid and thats siding with a particular entity at the expense of another entity all in the name of competition. I mean...what happens to the EU's legislative credibility if they continue to make such rulings against Microsoft and other corporations that hold large shares of their respective markets? Mike Connor said it best when we asserted that he was worried that Firefox could achieve IE's monopolistic status...why? Because it means the arguments of the EU and Microsoft's competitors will fall apart and the ultimate sufferer will be consumers because the decisions of the EU will have a significant effect on an organizations motivation to innovate to become a market leader.

If the decisions of the EU against Microsoft today, cause Microsoft to suffer significant marketshare declines in the future and Microsoft has products that are comparable to the competition in features and useability, then the pain will stretch to Microsoft's investors and it will come because the EU said they wanted to make everything as equal as possible.

If Opera really wanted to compete, I think the best way to do that would be for them to build their own OS and include their browser and other add-ons as default apps. That way they have head to head competition with the Microsoft offerings without having to depend on Microsoft to get their one product (the browser) to consumers.

NPGMBR, I fail to see how Microsoft would suffer significant marketshare. They're not selling Internet Explorer. I'd imagine that you could show that they're making money off of Internet Explorer in some ways, but I'd be very surprised if it contributed much.

I also don't think that the fear of the EU's rulings going on to other market leaders is very justified. The entire issue is arising because Microsoft is a market leader across multiple markets. That gives them the potential to leverage an unfair advantage against competitors that are limited to more specific markets. I don't really know that this scenario can be compared on a large scale, though, because the main issue is that when a person first buys a new computer, Internet Explorer (and nothing else) is what's presented to them. This is an example of Microsoft being able to leverage its market leader position as an OS vendor to create an unfair advantage in the web browser market.

If you ask me, requiring that Opera should make its own operating system to compete is a bit ridiculous. What if Microsoft started bundling other bits of software with Windows - say, an integrated web search, or Microsoft Office. Google is now too big to be harmed by that, but for the sake of argument, should Google be forced to build its own operating system in an effort to get people to use its search engine? Should any other Office-like competitor be forced to make their own operating system, too? That just seems like a huge waste of resources, it doesn't seem very practical, and I can't see how it would really benefit the consumer to have companies struggling to do so many things at once. It's better to have a choice, I think, but the choice needs to be one that's operable. Up until the Firefox revolution, browsers aside from IE were largely unusable because sites were catering to IE5/6.

And as to competitors with Microsoft Office, you do recall that Microsoft is also in trouble with the EU for not being better about sharing its Office file format standards, right? I'd imagine that the reasoning behind that is much the same as the reasoning behind the Internet Explorer issue.

while i don't think the EU should force 'other' browsers onto folks, its not like loading up the OS with 4 other browsers is going to help, or shipping a CD saying 'pick one'... Microsoft simply needs to not tie IE to Windows, there is no uninstall option, if they created that option under Programs and Features, no more EU issues. its not like having IE there (present) suddenly stops anybody from changing which browser they use, if you use google, they promote Chrome, Firefox, YouTube does this as well... people will see their choices, anybody using iTunes had Safari pop up in their face more than once

it is their OS, they have the right to ship a browser with it, Apple does it, Ubunto promotes Firefox, they could of built in their own firefox variant type browser but they didn't.

i think Mozilla should of simply declined having anything to do with this, its not the right image for them

artfuldodga said,
i think Mozilla should of simply declined having anything to do with this, its not the right image for them

Why? This is a good opportunity for them to get their product more known.

Switching back to IE also... Give me a break. So sick of the EU. Go sue apple also, be fair. (Not pro-Microsoft at all in fact I will be getting my first mac soon but shouldn't everyone be treated the same?)

James812 said,
Switching back to IE also... Give me a break. So sick of the EU. Go sue apple also, be fair. (Not pro-Microsoft at all in fact I will be getting my first mac soon but shouldn't everyone be treated the same?)

There's a big difference. You and everyone else screaming in support of Microsoft or bashing FireFox/Opera have all too quickly forgotten what it was like to visit webpages that were either totally broken outside of Internet Explorer, or that would say "you're not using a supported browser - please come back to this page when you've upgraded." Do you wonder why Firefox and Opera had "Mask as Internet Explorer" options, yet Internet Explorer never had "mask as Firefox" or "Mask as Opera" options?

It has absolutely nothing to do with which browser is better or which browser sucks, although it certainly is fun to think it is. The simple matter is that, like it or not, Microsoft's operating system is used by the vast majority of computer users. By default, that means that the vast majority of people are using Internet Explorer as their web browser. Of course web sites were designed around Internet Explorer - it barely followed web standards, and the average person wouldn't understand that when a webpage didn't work that it was because their browser was in the wrong. If everyone's driving on the wrong side of the road and they're complaining, then what are you going to do? Make that the right side of the right, of course.

The trouble is that with a situation like that, Microsoft was suddenly in control of web standards. Other browsers may have existed, but even if people cared to use them they would inevitably feel that they were unusable simply because those browsers were trying to support the agreed-upon standards AND Microsoft's standards. Microsoft probably didn't have the intent to rewrite the web standards, but it's what started happening. And since Microsoft wasn't really making it well-known how their standards were supposed to go (or how they would differ from the general standards) it made competition unfair. How can you run in a race when the objectives are constantly changed? Is it fair to have a competitor designing the rules as opposed to a more or less unbiased committee?

That's also the reason why it makes no sense to target Apple. Sure, it seems like the vast majority of Apple users stick with Safari. That's likely a small blip in internet traffic compared to what Internet Explorer used to be; maybe even compared to what it is now. Nobody is going to start designing webpages specifically for Safari. Microsoft, by virtue of having a much greater market share, is in a much greater position of power. As the saying goes, "with great power comes great responsibility" - sorry if this seems unfair to Microsoft, but it's necessary to ensure that things remain fair for everyone else.

It's a pity that I see so many replies that seem to miss that point. I don't know - maybe these are people who joined the internet during the Firefox era and take it for granted, or who have short memories. These days, eeing those messages of "sorry but your browser is not supported" are largely a thing of the past, and you have true freedom of using which ever browser you want. Appreciate it, and respect the factors that make that possible.

Ledgem said,
There's a big difference. You and everyone else screaming in support of Microsoft or bashing FireFox/Opera have all too quickly forgotten what it was like to visit webpages that were either totally broken outside of Internet Explorer, or that would say "you're not using a supported browser - please come back to this page when you've upgraded." Do you wonder why Firefox and Opera had "Mask as Internet Explorer" options, yet Internet Explorer never had "mask as Firefox" or "Mask as Opera" options?


looks like someone really hit the main point.
I also agreed with you bro.

I actually only got that 'you're browser is not supported" message when I used IE. Altho I am as you say a member of the 'firefox' generation of internet users.

So Mozilla have joined Opera with their fight against Microsoft, but how come Mozilla don't seem to agree with Opera's claims?!?!

What is it with Opera, because their browser sucks! A version of Windows 7 without IE?? Like that will sell well, just like Windows XP Home/Pro N without WMP, oh wait, it didn't sell at all!!

Mike also added that he was "kind of worried" about Firefox achieving the monopolistic status of Internet Explorer.

Don't worry, that will never happen!

I use FF on Windows 7 because IE8 is still buggy on the Beta release, but when Windows 7 RC/RTM is released I will go back to using IE exclusively like I did on Vista. Don't get me wrong, I like Firefox, but I'd rather stick to using ONE browser, which is IE.

I'm not sure if you guys read the whole article but it actually looks as though Mozilla is joining the debate so they can disagree with what Opera is arguing. Not sure why that would make you uninstall Firefox.

I'm actually giving Opera 10 a go at this point since I'm also on Win7 and though IE8 hasn't given me any problems I figured I'd try out Opera again for old times sake.

It's ok, but I've never had problems with IE, and if MS gets IE8 working good standards wise, and also gives us good pefformance, it'll be hard to use Opera again.

solvent said,
So you people which software to use because of ONE article. That's adult behaviour....


I feel no need to support a company that I don't agree with. What's not adult about that? I read Baker's blog article and I didn't like what she had to say.

I don't like Steve Ballmer but I still use Windows. I don't like Steve Jobs but I still use my iPod. I don't like some of the trolls here on Neowin, but I still frequent the site.

My point with this is that you'll never be able to agree with every individual. If you live your life around people you don't agree with, you won't be doing too much. :

Though, your right to stop using any product or service is entirely up to you, and I respect that.

As for Mozilla, it seems there is a bit of debate in how they see things in this case. They obviously don't wholeheartedly agree with Opera. What may come of this all is unknown though...

Whatever shred of respect I had for Mozilla just flew out the window. Sorry but if you can't compete with your product and feel the need to stoop this low, I can't be bothered to give you a chance. Fine by me, there was never anything wrong with IE to begin with. Just people's mis-conceptions.

I can picture the old days when you saw multiple icons on the desktop for ISPs. I wonder how long it will take for them to just install IE, Firefox, Opera, and probably Chrome with all installs of Windows and call it a day.

Or as others are saying, the best way to do this would be to have a selection during the Windows install rather than already have all of them installed.

I Agree with @+Recon415 - this is absolute crap and doesn't make any logical sense. By that logic all Operating Systems should come stripped bare. With no Media Player, File Browser, Internet Browser....etc. That way the user can try accessing the net to get their browser from there...

Microsoft could just quit selling their OS over there. See how the EU fairs after that.

Absolutely, if there's no browser then there should be no media player etc.. Except, that'd be stupid.

But don't go saying Microsoft should stop selling Windows in Europe! It's not our fault we're run by morons. I for one would rue the day that I get an OS and have to choose from a list of different programs that I may or may not want to install. The EU should have laughed this out of court.

If you bundle any browser with Windows, you hit the same issue that you are forcing said browser onto people. Also, if you give them the choice, most people would probably recognize IE or Microsoft and just select it anyway. I doubt very few consumers would take the time to try other browsers or even weigh their options when presented with a choice of browsers.

I agree with you to a certain extent. A large majority of the users who think that IE is "the internet" would most likely choose IE to begin with.
"Oh, I know what Internet Explorer is. What is Firefox?"

Most people who know anything about browsers will do their own Windows installations, while those who don't know anything about computers will have pre-built ones that could possibly already have a browser pre-installed by the OEM.

Maybe. But a method is required for an average user to be able to interact with the web so they can then download the browser of their choice. Or a link to a download site, but then again which one should it be??? There is no end to this. That download site will be accused of being ran/supported by MS. Damn it people...

BTW a media player, an instant messenger etc. should not be bundled with an OS either. Instead MS, Apple etc should have OS releases with and without the bundled software. I would go for the stripped down version, but I am not an average user - meaning I have to reinstall my OS every 6-8 months as it becomes slow and/or unreliable... I hate to be forced to waste time to get rid of/disable bundled crap then install my preferred apps.

solvent said,
Maybe. But a method is required for an average user to be able to interact with the web so they can then download the browser of their choice. Or a link to a download site, but then again which one should it be??? There is no end to this. That download site will be accused of being ran/supported by MS. Damn it people...

BTW a media player, an instant messenger etc. should not be bundled with an OS either. Instead MS, Apple etc should have OS releases with and without the bundled software. I would go for the stripped down version, but I am not an average user - meaning I have to reinstall my OS every 6-8 months as it becomes slow and/or unreliable... I hate to be forced to waste time to get rid of/disable bundled crap then install my preferred apps.

the average user wants a complete solution
linux comes with tons of apps and linux brags how it comes with an office suite and a browser and email and all that
this is really stupid
but an easy solution is for MS to release a version of windows just for whiners who think windows should be released just for them..and dont consider that old couple that needs to use a PC right out of the box

Recon415 said,
Okay...so I declare that Apple should be also sued for bundling Safari with their OS X.

Microsoft has a MUCH higher share than Mac and that's why it's being targeted.

Tha Bloo Monkee said,
Microsoft has a MUCH higher share than Mac and that's why it's being targeted.

So a successful company should be punished until its competitors gain the same market share?

Recon415 said,
Okay...so I declare that Apple should be also sued for bundling Safari with their OS X.

afair it was opera idea. but opera is a monopolist on smartphones operating systems. so eu should sue them as well.

fobban said,
So a successful company should be punished until its competitors gain the same market share?

looks like that. mozilla was unable to do anything real good since many years, just bulling and bulling people with their crap. so they've found an easier way.

Most of this could be avoided IF they'd allow what to choose during installation and have most everything else easily removable, including IE.

Yup. IE is tightly integrated with Windows. But the idea was to push Microsoft to allow other browsers to be integrated on Windows as a default browser in the very beginning of FRESH install of the OS.