Windows 7 ballot screen doesn't benefit any browser

Back in February, when Microsoft launched the Windows 7 ballot screen in Europe, it was believed that it might allow other browsers to compete against the dominant browser, Internet Explorer. However, after further research, no browser really benefits from the Windows 7 ballot screen in Europe.

When compared with the worldwide trend of browsers, there is as much or as little as 1% difference between worldwide trends and Europe, based on statistics from statcounter.com.

Google Chrome has increased by 6.4% since January in Europe, and 6.24% worldwide; Internet Explorer has lost 5.25% in Europe, and 5.92% worldwide; Firefox has lost 1.23% in Europe and 0.41% worldwide; Opera has gained 0.05% in Europe and 0.8% worldwide, and Safari has gained 0.86% in Europe and gained nothing in worldwide market share.

Internet Explorer seems to continue its downward trend, where it is getting dangerously close to losing its decade-long run of being the most used browser in history. IE is about to lose its lead to Mozilla Firefox, sometime early next year, unless Google has something to say.

  

Google Chrome may have only launched two years ago, but is already making a huge splash in the browser market share, gaining just under one percent every month, about as much as IE loses every month. Google Chrome has made a large impact on the European market, but they have also made significant increase in the North American market as well. The increase may not be as large as the European or worldwide trend, but it has done better than any other browser over the past eight months.

  

It also appears that North Americans aren't ditching Internet Explorer just yet. IE lost 1.37% since January of this year, while Firefox has dropped a massive 3.47% in the same time period. Both IE and Firefox lost market share in both North American markets and worldwide.

 

Aside from Google Chrome, Safari was the only other browser that has shown some improvement in market share in all three categories, increasing by 0.97% in North America, and a 0.8% increase in worldwide market share.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft sends out Office and SharePoint 2010 SP1 invites

Next Story

UK ISP Virgin Media rolls out 100Mb broadband

111 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I don't understand why all these ignorant hypocrites are whining about Opera. Mozilla and Google both backed and fully supported the antitrust complaint, and the ballot screen was Microsoft's own idea. And yet, the same hypocrites are constantly whining about Opera every chance they get.

We get it, crybabies, you can't be bothered to educate yourselves about the facts of the case, so you continue to moan every chance you get. How about getting a life?

It's funny about all the whining.

Why aren't these people whining about Google's antitrust complaints against Microsoft?

Why aren't these people whining about Microsoft's antitrust complaints against Google?

Why aren't these people whining about Google and Mozilla's heavy involvement and full support in the EU antitrust case?

Are antitrust complaints only bad when a small company does it?

Hypocrisy rocks! Hypocrisy and ignorance.

PreKe said,
It's funny about all the whining.

Why aren't these people whining about Google's antitrust complaints against Microsoft?

Why aren't these people whining about Microsoft's antitrust complaints against Google?

Why aren't these people whining about Google and Mozilla's heavy involvement and full support in the EU antitrust case?

Are antitrust complaints only bad when a small company does it?

Hypocrisy rocks! Hypocrisy and ignorance.

It's because this case had a bull**** end. A web browser is a crucial feature of any operating system, therefore it can't be considered tying to include a browser with an OS.

mrp04 said,
It's because this case had a bull**** end. A web browser is a crucial feature of any operating system, therefore it can't be considered tying to include a browser with an OS.

You are trying to change the topic again. Stop spewing your ignorant nonsense, and answer the questions:

Why aren't you whining about Google's antitrust complaints against Microsoft?

Why aren't you whining about Microsoft's antitrust complaints against Google?

Why aren't you whining about Google and Mozilla's heavy involvement and full support in the EU antitrust case?

Are antitrust complaints only bad when a small company does it?

mrp04 said,

It's because this case had a bull**** end. A web browser is a crucial feature of any operating system, therefore it can't be considered tying to include a browser with an OS.

It can be considered when a browser like IE 6, 7 (king of the hill mostly because bundled with an OS having 90% market share) doesn't support standard which create a fragmented web where most of the code is not standard but made to support IE.

I think people doesn't realise where we are today. And where we used to be. We are lucky MS was lazy with IE (no tabs support for a while, ...) which greatly helped Firefox to become popular.

I remember a day where IE had 80+% market share. A lot of web sites was not properly working on anything beside IE. Gamespot used to be IE only. I remember when Firefox started to be popular there's was a lot of complain on Gamespot forum about the site not working properly on standard web browser. Basically people wanted to use Firefox but most site was written for IE. Companies had to invest money to make their site standard. And companies did it because Firefox market share became high enough.

It's not as bad today because MS doesn't have any choix to support standard with IE 9. MS is in this position today because it was extremely lazy with IE 6, 7.

Ms wants to bundle IE. ok. But make it standard so other browsers can work too.

PreKe said,
It's funny about all the whining.

Why aren't these people whining about Google's antitrust complaints against Microsoft?

Why aren't these people whining about Microsoft's antitrust complaints against Google?

Why aren't these people whining about Google and Mozilla's heavy involvement and full support in the EU antitrust case?

Are antitrust complaints only bad when a small company does it?

Hypocrisy rocks! Hypocrisy and ignorance.

So many questions and begging.

Opera just plain sucks, move on.

This is must be EU, not Europe, as Opera has over 25% in Eastern Europe with larger population than Western Europe..

thartist said,
Whoa! Opera with 10+% in US? is that desktop only or Opera Mini too??

It also includes Opera: La Boheme, Opera: The Marriage of Figaro, Opera: Don Giovanni and Opera: Madame Butterfly, on and off Broadway productions as well as rural town high-school productions of Pirates of Penzance, Cats and Grease.

thatguyandrew1992 said,
Microsoft shouldn't have to have this stupid browser ballot screen.

It was their own solution though in response to that complaint.

thatguyandrew1992 said,
Microsoft shouldn't have to have this stupid browser ballot screen.

Microsoft shouldn't have broken the law, then.

PreKe said,

Microsoft shouldn't have broken the law, then.

What law did they break that caused the EU to force them to do this? Stop saying that generic sentence and state it.

Way back in the 90s when the United States sued them, it was for tying. Back then the competitive browsers cost money. Internet Explorer had become part of Windows but Microsoft got hit for tying it with Windows.
Internet Explorer is now free, so no one is being forced to purchase it when they buy Windows.
Sure, the money they get to develop it comes from purchases of Windows.

But Apple gets the money to develop Safari from purchases of the products it is included with. Why doesn't the EU force Apple to stop "tying" or have them include a ballot screen?

mrp04 said,
What law did they break that caused the EU to force them to do this?

Are you drunk or something? They broke European Competition Law!

Internet Explorer is now free, so no one is being forced to purchase it when they buy Windows.

Actually, they are. IE is sold as part of Windows. But never mind that. It's just another red herring from you.

But Apple gets the money to develop Safari from purchases of the products it is included with. Why doesn't the EU force Apple to stop "tying" or have them include a ballot screen?

This has been explained over and over. Stop repeating the same old crap in every single thread.

Microsoft = desktop OS monopoly.

Apple = no desktop OS monopoly.

PreKe said,
Actually, they are. IE is sold as part of Windows.

Really? So how much money from each sale of Windows is attributed towards IE? Oh, wait, you can't tell us. Because IE is free.

PreKe said,
Are you drunk or something? They broke European Competition Law!

No, they didn't. No court has ever decreed a ruling to that effect. You're just repeating your nonsense over and over as loudly and obnoxiously as you can, desperately hoping that that will make it true.

Samurizer said,
Really? So how much money from each sale of Windows is attributed towards IE? Oh, wait, you can't tell us. Because IE is free.

Nothing is free, dear ignorant child. Microsoft spends money on the development of IE, and what you are doing now is to deny that IE is part of Windows. Amazing.

No, they didn't. No court has ever decreed a ruling to that effect. You're just repeating your nonsense over and over as loudly and obnoxiously as you can, desperately hoping that that will make it true.

Yes, they did indeed break the law, which is why they had to suffer the consequences of their violations. You really are ignorant of antitrust law, aren't you?

PreKe said,
Nothing is free, dear ignorant child. Microsoft spends money on the development of IE, and what you are doing now is to deny that IE is part of Windows. Amazing.

Nothing is free, but that doesn't mean consumers are necessarily paying for everything, dear ignorant child. And it looks like in addition to your other handicaps, you apparently are unable to read as well. At no point did I deny that IE is part of Windows, and even if I did, I'd be completely right: IE is a part of Windows as much as Firefox is a part of Linux and Safari is a part of OS X.

PreKe said,
Yes, they did indeed break the law, which is why they had to suffer the consequences of their violations. You really are ignorant of antitrust law, aren't you?

No court has ever decreed that Microsoft broke the law in this case, despite how desperately your rabid anti-Microsoft fanboy sentiments wish it were the case. You really are ignorant of plain logic and reality, aren't you?

Samurizer said,
Nothing is free, but that doesn't mean consumers are necessarily paying for everything, dear ignorant child.

Those who pay for Windows, pay for IE.

At no point did I deny that IE is part of Windows, and even if I did, I'd be completely right: IE is a part of Windows as much as Firefox is a part of Linux and Safari is a part of OS X.

So?

thatguyandrew1992 said,
Microsoft shouldn't have to have this stupid browser ballot screen.

BUT will you say the same thing if Opera up-trended because of the ballot screen?

I don't think the point was to benefit any browser ... In fact if the ballot screen would actually benefit any browser it would not do its job.

Third paragraph: "..and Safari has gained 0.86% in Europe and gained nothing in worldwide market share."

Last paragraph: "..Safari was the only other browser that has shown some improvement in market share in all three categories, increasing by 0.97% in North America, and a 0.8% increase in worldwide market share."

Which is it, did it gain worldwide market share or not?

there never should have been a ballot screen. ms should be able to include ie, people have a choice after windows is installed. and besides.. apple should have a ballot screen if ms has to have one

:B: Rex said,
there never should have been a ballot screen. ms should be able to include ie, people have a choice after windows is installed. and besides.. apple should have a ballot screen if ms has to have one

The problem isn't that Microsoft included IE, it's that they abused their monopoly to undermine competition.

:B: Rex said,
ms should be able to include ie

Also, are you whiners even paying attention? IE is included!

apple should have a ballot screen if ms has to have one

No they shouldn't. Apple didn't break the law, unlike Microsoft.

PreKe said,

Also, are you whiners even paying attention? IE is included!


No they shouldn't. Apple didn't break the law, unlike Microsoft.

IE is included, yes, but that is what everyone is complaining about.
Apple includes Safari, but no one complains.

What about Google? They have a "monopoly" on internet search and are using it to advertise one of their other products (chrome), why does no one complain about that? Chrome is gaining ground quickly because of that.

mrp04 said,
IE is included, yes, but that is what everyone is complaining about.
Apple includes Safari, but no one complains.

Why are you repeating this drivel over and over again? It's been addressed already.

No one is complaining about IE being included. Microsoft is facing the consequences of illegally abusing its monopoly. Apple has no such monopoly on the desktop.

What about Google? They have a "monopoly" on internet search and are using it to advertise one of their other products (chrome), why does no one complain about that? Chrome is gaining ground quickly because of that.

You would have to show that Google is engaging in anti-competitive practices. But considering the fact that you are totally clueless about these things, you wouldn't understand antitrust law if it punched you in the face.

but Microsoft is cheating, indeed it show the ballot screen but also it show a screen over the ballot screen about to configure Internet Explorer.

Magallanes said,
but Microsoft is cheating, indeed it show the ballot screen but also it show a screen over the ballot screen about to configure Internet Explorer.
In specific situations.

In the meantime, lawyers have profited much from all these litigations, and Opera, the one that started the issue of the ballot has not gained at all. Is a lose-lose situation where not only MS and Opera lost, but also the consumer who now has a cumbersome extra step in the setup of their machine. The worst part is that in a few years some other company will complain that MS bundles stuff, and the same court will again make the same mistake even when the results have proven to be negative to all parties. Tech companies need to compete based on merits and stop crying, if the can't take the heat of the competition, then leave the game.

Charles Keledjian said,
Is a lose-lose situation where not only MS and Opera lost, but also the consumer who now has a cumbersome extra step in the setup of their machine.

Reading the stat the other way, +5% of European is now enlightened and NOT using IE. That's a lot of people. Enough to scare MS into re-establishing the IE team and innovate with IE9.

Charles Keledjian said,
Tech companies need to compete based on merits
So ... you realize that was kind of the point of the the ballot screen?

Kirkburn said,
So ... you realize that was kind of the point of the the ballot screen?

The ballot screan meant "Hey, I'm some random window you won't read entirely, and I'm offering you a choice you don't care about in which all browsers say they are the best, what will you do?" to most people.

Aethec said,

The ballot screan meant "Hey, I'm some random window you won't read entirely, and I'm offering you a choice you don't care about in which all browsers say they are the best, what will you do?" to most people.
It's true to an extent, I'm just pointing out you can't complain about the ballot screen for the thing it was trying to help fix.

Kirkburn said,
It's true to an extent, I'm just pointing out you can't complain about the ballot screen for the thing it was trying to help fix.
I can.
MS didn't stop you from installing whatever you wanted, so what was the point ? It shouldn't be MS's job to educate you as to the alternatives.

The consumer being dumb shouldn't be MS's fault. It's the consumers fault.

Ryoken said,
I can.
MS didn't stop you from installing whatever you wanted, so what was the point ? It shouldn't be MS's job to educate you as to the alternatives.

The consumer being dumb shouldn't be MS's fault. It's the consumers fault.

In a competitive market yes it would be MS job to actually educate you about which 3rd party products is avalaible for their system.

The problem is it's not a competitive market.

If the market share of OSx would be 30% and Linux another 30% you can be 100% sure MS would tell you hey! we have this 3rd party app it's hot.

Why do you think MS acts differently with the 360 ???

With the 360 MS push 3dr party products really hard. MS goes as far as marketing exclusive 3rd party products made for the 360. Why ??? Because the console market is a competitive one and MS can't just push their own software. Nintendo does it and it will be their downfall eventually.

If MS would market halo only it would already be out of this market.

Charles Keledjian said,
In the meantime, lawyers have profited much from all these litigations, and Opera, the one that started the issue of the ballot has not gained at all.

Your ignorance is quite amazing.

First of all, Opera didn't sue Microsoft. All Opera did was to report Microsoft's anti-competitive practices to the authorities, with support from Mozilla and Google.

Also, Opera reported accelerated growth after the ballot screen.

Tech companies need to compete based on merits and stop crying, if the can't take the heat of the competition, then leave the game.

There's a reason why antitrust laws exist. Microsoft illegally prevented competition. Mozilla, Google, and a number of other companies were in full support of an antitrust case against Microsoft.

Heck, Google has filed its own antitrust complaints against Microsoft in the past, and vice versa.

LaP said,

In a competitive market yes it would be MS job to actually educate you about which 3rd party products is avalaible for their system.

The problem is it's not a competitive market.

I'm sorry, but how is it Microsoft's job to educate the user about competitive browsers in ANY kind of market? When you go to the Nissan dealership, do you expect them to show you all their competitor's vehicles and what advantages they have over their own?

LaP said,

If the market share of OSx would be 30% and Linux another 30% you can be 100% sure MS would tell you hey! we have this 3rd party app it's hot.

What?

LaP said,

Why do you think MS acts differently with the 360 ???

With the 360 MS push 3dr party products really hard. MS goes as far as marketing exclusive 3rd party products made for the 360. Why ??? Because the console market is a competitive one and MS can't just push their own software. Nintendo does it and it will be their downfall eventually.

If MS would market halo only it would already be out of this market.

You HAVE to be joking. This isn't anywhere NEAR the same thing. These are all games and are all different. They don't directly compete with each other and don't do the exact same thing. Microsoft also gets part of the profit on ANY 360 game sold, so it is in their best interest for all games to sell as much as possible.
Microsoft loses money (potential search revenue) for every Windows user who switches to a different browser.

You're probably just another Microsoft basher.

mrp04 said,
I'm sorry, but how is it Microsoft's job to educate the user about competitive browsers in ANY kind of market?

It is when they blatantly violated the law.

When you go to the Nissan dealership, do you expect them to show you all their competitor's vehicles and what advantages they have over their own?

Yes, if they broke the law. In fact, Coca Cola was convicted of anti-competitive practices, and had to include Pepsi in their fridges.

Why should companies be able to break the law without consequences?

You're probably just another Microsoft basher.

You think it's better to be Microsoft defender drone who doesn't bother to educate himself about the facts and the law?

PreKe said,

It is when they blatantly violated the law.


Yes, if they broke the law. In fact, Coca Cola was convicted of anti-competitive practices, and had to include Pepsi in their fridges.

Why should companies be able to break the law without consequences?


You think it's better to be Microsoft defender drone who doesn't bother to educate himself about the facts and the law?

How did they break the law? By including one of their products in one of their other products?
How come Apple doesn't face any litigation by the EU? They include a ton of their products with others. iTunes and Safari and Quicktime are all one package, whether you want one or all three.

mrp04 said,
How did they break the law? By including one of their products in one of their other products?
How come Apple doesn't face any litigation by the EU?

When are you going to stop mindlessly parroting your employer's talking points?

Microsoft broke the law by illegally leveraging their monopoly in order to prevent competition.

Apple does not hold a monopoly on the desktop.

Now stop spewing nonsense, please.

mrp04 said,

I'm sorry, but how is it Microsoft's job to educate the user about competitive browsers in ANY kind of market? When you go to the Nissan dealership, do you expect them to show you all their competitor's vehicles and what advantages they have over their own?

What?

You HAVE to be joking. This isn't anywhere NEAR the same thing. These are all games and are all different. They don't directly compete with each other and don't do the exact same thing. Microsoft also gets part of the profit on ANY 360 game sold, so it is in their best interest for all games to sell as much as possible.
Microsoft loses money (potential search revenue) for every Windows user who switches to a different browser.

You're probably just another Microsoft basher.

What ???

Game companies are not competing with each other ???

Software is sowftware. Office does compete with OpenOffice. IE does compete with Firefox. MSN did compete with ISQ.

And yes game companies do compete with each other. You can be sure Blizzard are perfectly happy to be the number 1 right now and you can be sure Blizzard wont be happy when a mmorpg will come and steal that spot.

The reason why MS is so happy to market games like GTA is not because those games are not competing with the ones made by MS. It's Because MS doesn't have any choice to do so.

If MS market their games only the 360 will die. MS needs to work REALLY hard to bring titles like GTA to the 360 even if it means giving some money hat.

That's a thing MS doesn't have to do with Windows simply because there's no serious competition.

I stand to my point. If Mac had 50% market share and Mac had this hot exclusive app everyone like to use you can be sure MS would absolutely want to bring this hot app to windows. And youc an be sure MS would work hard to let the users know they have this hot app Mac doesn't have.

BTW i love the argument "you are just a MS basher". It's great here on neowin as soon as you say something remotely negative about MS you are a hater.

Edited by LaP, Oct 28 2010, 1:31pm :

Eh? Something is a miss, Opera in double figures, in America of all places, that would be believable if it was for Europe but not America.

thealexweb said,
Eh? Something is a miss, Opera in double figures, in America of all places, that would be believable if it was for Europe but not America.

Hmmm, the graph seems to be different to the numbers in the chart underneath. It seems highly unlikely that Opera would have a market share similar to Chrome.

theyarecomingforyou said,

Hmmm, the graph seems to be different to the numbers in the chart underneath. It seems highly unlikely that Opera would have a market share similar to Chrome.

I noticed the same. The graphs and charts are screwed up.

theyarecomingforyou said,
It seems highly unlikely that Opera would have a market share similar to Chrome.

Opera has more than 140 million users.

How many users does Chrome have?

What a surprise...
If I know a browser, I downloaded and installed it already. If I know not any other browser than IE, what browser I choose from this ballot screen? All browsers contain "Safer, faster, better" in the description. If I click on "Tell me more", all websites from the browsers tell me the same, "Choose me. I am the best". Maybe I would stay with the browser that I already know (IE) or I would choose an browser from a known company (Microsoft, Google, Apple)
I am sure this +0.84% for "others" is +0.84% for the "green browser", because it have the best name. The + for Chrome is maybe the result of advertisement on many websites, but it's ot the result of the ballot screen.

Is it me, or are the graphs / table wrong?
Take North America. The graph says opera and chrome are both around 10% for october 2010.
However, the table says that its Safari and Chrome that are around 10%, with Opera having less than 1%.

the issue with the DOJ was microsoft was in fact killing trying to netscape. But that was a different era. and in that era internet explorer on 9x proved to be detrimental to performance and security and lack of choice was not tollerated as much as it is now. People seem largely willing to give up control now a days for simplicity. Look at the iOS devices yes its trendy and easy but what kind of control do you have. This makes apple more dangerous and anticompetitive then microsoft was back in the day, and it seems no one is willing to actually see it or do anything about it. Hello? DOJ... EU... HELLO?!

Oh and Safari market share climbing is due to more people buying macs/using iOS Devices/and not caring that unless you stop it installing itunes will install safari and attempt to take over your system as the default browser... hmm sounds alot like IE tactics from the 90s doesn't it?

Both Netscape and IE set their product as the default browser, as did Mosaic. This was normal behaviour for all web browsers of the time. I can't remember at which version number but both Netscape and IE stopped automatically doing that within weeks of each other due to a public outcry of frustration that users' preferences weren't being respected.

As I recall, it wasn't a case of one side being more proactive than the other, it was simply down to the release schedule.

I was referring more to the bundling aspect yes you can opt out but seriously there are tons of people on the internet that blindly kick next on everything.

Matt A. Tobin said,
the issue with the DOJ was microsoft was in fact killing trying to netscape. But that was a different era. and in that era internet explorer on 9x proved to be detrimental to performance and security and lack of choice was not tollerated as much as it is now. People seem largely willing to give up control now a days for simplicity. Look at the iOS devices yes its trendy and easy but what kind of control do you have. This makes apple more dangerous and anticompetitive then microsoft was back in the day, and it seems no one is willing to actually see it or do anything about it. Hello? DOJ... EU... HELLO?!
It's not anticompetitive, because no one forces you to buy an iOS device..

Ryoken said,
It's not anticompetitive, because no one forces you to buy an iOS device..

It would become anticompetitive if Mac had close to 100% market share. The only reason it's not anticompetitive is because the market share is too low.

Ryoken said,
It's not anticompetitive, because no one forces you to buy an iOS device..

And Microsoft bundling Internet Explorer with Windows isn't anti-competitive either. They don't block you from installing a different browser and don't force you to use it. People want a complete OS experience, and not including a web browser with an operating system is a big problem.

mrp04 said,
And Microsoft bundling Internet Explorer with Windows isn't anti-competitive either.

No, but what they did to prevent other browsers from competing was.

Stop talking nonsense now, please. You have obviously not educated yourself, and are just spewing the same old fallacies and misconceptions.

People want a complete OS experience, and not including a web browser with an operating system is a big problem.

What on earth are you talking about? Windows does not come without a browser. Now, Microsoft suggested removing IE from Windows, but the EC rejected the suggestion.

Your amazing ignorance shines through again.

LaP said,

It would become anticompetitive if Mac had close to 100% market share. The only reason it's not anticompetitive is because the market share is too low.

That is not how it works.

Microsoft bundling Internet Explorer with Windows is NOT an anti-competitive practice.
An anti-competitive practice would be if they didn't allow you to install an alternative, made the alternative not work as well, or things of that nature.

Does Microsoft do this? No, they do not.

[quote=PreKe said,]
No, but what they did to prevent other browsers from competing was.

Stop talking nonsense now, please. You have obviously not educated yourself, and are just spewing the same old fallacies and misconceptions.[/quote]
What have they done to prevent other browsers from competing? People have always been free to choose whichever browser they wanted.

Stop talking nonsense now, please.


What on earth are you talking about? Windows does not come without a browser. Now, Microsoft suggested removing IE from Windows, but the EC rejected the suggestion.

Your amazing ignorance shines through again.[/quote]

mrp04 said,
Microsoft bundling Internet Explorer with Windows is NOT an anti-competitive practice.

Not necessarily, but the way Microsoft did it was clearly a violation of the law. They abused their monopoly, which is illegal.

Samurizer said,
What have they done to prevent other browsers from competing?

Read the papers of the case and educate yourself instead of speculating wildly.

PreKe said,

Read the papers of the case and educate yourself instead of speculating wildly.

*BZZT* Wrong. You gave your personal opinion, but only a court's opinion counts when deciding who's guilty of what, not yours.

PreKe said,

Read the papers of the case and educate yourself instead of speculating wildly.

Stop wasting time with your nonsense. Your claims are nothing but desperate lies, and you know it just as well as the next person. It's just the rabid anti-MS fanboy in you refusing to admit it.

Samurizer said,
*BZZT* Wrong. You gave your personal opinion, but only a court's opinion counts when deciding who's guilty of what, not yours.

The EC found Microsoft guilty.

Stop wasting time with your nonsense. Your claims are nothing but desperate lies, and you know it just as well as the next person. It's just the rabid anti-MS fanboy in you refusing to admit it.

You really should educate yourself. But I guess willful ignorance is much easier.

PreKe said,
The EC found Microsoft guilty.

You're either extremely ignorant, are living in an alternate reality, have a fantastic ability to put yourself in denial, or are a brazen but pathetically incompetent liar. The EC launched investigations on Microsoft. At no point was Microsoft formally declared guilty by any party qualified to make that decision. save perhaps in your imagination.

PreKe said,
You really should educate yourself. But I guess willful ignorance is much easier.

You really should stop living in denial, it's bad for your mental health.

Samurizer said,
You're either extremely ignorant, are living in an alternate reality, have a fantastic ability to put yourself in denial, or are a brazen but pathetically incompetent liar. The EC launched investigations on Microsoft. At no point was Microsoft formally declared guilty by any party qualified to make that decision. save perhaps in your imagination.

Actually, Microsoft was indeed found to have violated European Competition Law, hence the settlement where Microsoft proposed the ballot screen to avoid fines.

PreKe said,

Actually, Microsoft was indeed found to have violated European Competition Law, hence the settlement where Microsoft proposed the ballot screen to avoid fines.

That has got to be one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. Anyon who isn't hopelessly trapped in their rabid anti-Microsoft agenda could've easily told you the reason Microsoft proposed the ballot was that, instead of wasting time and resources defending themselves against a frivolous investigation that resulted from an equally frivolous complaint, they simply chose to appease the EC by presenting a ballot that changes nothing whatsoever. That the EC accepted the ballot proposal as a "solution" to the "problem" only shows how incompetent they are, now go away and stop wasting our time with such ignorant nonsense.

Dark Atheist said,
waits to see how Opera will moan about it ;-)

Ha........my first good laugh of the day! I agree, will be interesting to see if/what they say.

Dark Atheist said,
waits to see how Opera will moan about it ;-)

This is getting old now, and additionally, get you facts right. If you dont know what Im talking about, research a bit.

P1R4T3 said,

This is getting old now, and additionally, get you facts right. If you dont know what Im talking about, research a bit.

I must agree. Opera's moaning is getting old...

P1R4T3 said,

This is getting old now, and additionally, get you facts right. If you dont know what Im talking about, research a bit.

+1

Opera bashing: favorite hobbies of emo's...

Dark Atheist said,
waits to see how Opera will moan about it ;-)

Now we know who are using Opera here.

CLUE: They hate being reminded of Opera's whining about why they can't uptrend much.

I really don't understand people. Opera complained about a legitimate issue, which was upheld by a European court. Don't forget that Microsoft also defaults to Bing, which increases the revenue they generate from ads - we're talking about millions of dollars here. Personally I'm glad that the European courts are willing to take a stance against anti-competitive business practices, as the DOJ has been completely ineffectual.

RealFduch said,
I must agree. Opera's moaning is getting old...

The only moaning I see here is from ignorant bigots who seem to forget that the ballot screen was Microsoft's own idea, and that Mozilla and Google fully supported it. Mozilla wrote endlessly about the antitrust case, and were fully supportive of it from the start.

So why the trolls are only whining about Opera, I have no idea.

thenonhacker said,
But worth repeating, so that they will be ashamed doing it again.

What are you talking about?

The ballot screen was Microsoft's own idea. Opera had nothing to do with it.

Also, Mozilla and Google fully supported the ballot screen and encouraged its use.

So if anyone should be ashamed, it's ignorant people like you.

thenonhacker said,
Now we know who are using Opera here.

CLUE: They hate being reminded of Opera's whining about why they can't uptrend much.


What are you whining about?

The antitrust case was fully backed and supported by the likes of Google and Mozilla.

Furthermore, Opera's desktop user base has more than doubled in the last couple of years. Opera Mini doubles every single year. Opera now has more than 140 million users across the world on all their browsers.

What rational people hate is that ignorant people like you constantly whine about Opera even though the ballot screen was Microsoft's own idea, and even though Mozilla, Google and others fully supported the antitrust complaint, and were heavily involved.

So when you only whine about Opera, your hypocrisy really shows.

PreKe said,

What are you talking about?

The ballot screen was Microsoft's own idea. Opera had nothing to do with it.

Also, Mozilla and Google fully supported the ballot screen and encouraged its use.

So if anyone should be ashamed, it's ignorant people like you.

The ballot screen was Microsoft's idea to appease the EU after Opera's complaint and moaning... That was all. Opera also wanted Microsoft to change IE's logo because it is "Too recognizable". That's how ridiculous Opera's childish nonsense is...

theyarecomingforyou said,
I really don't understand people. Opera complained about a legitimate issue, which was upheld by a European court. Don't forget that Microsoft also defaults to Bing, which increases the revenue they generate from ads - we're talking about millions of dollars here. Personally I'm glad that the European courts are willing to take a stance against anti-competitive business practices, as the DOJ has been completely ineffectual.

So? You bought a Microsoft Product (Windows) which includes Microsoft Internet Explorer, whose default search engine is Microsoft Bing. If you get one of Google's prodcuts (Chrome), its default search engine is Google.
Apple's product (OS X) comes with Safari, Apple's browser. Since they don't have their own search engine, the default is Google.

How is Microsoft Internet Explorer being included with Microsoft Windows a problem? It isn't, the EU just wanted some easy cash from Microsoft and wanted to try giving one of their own an advantage

Microsoft never has blocked anyone from installing their own browser on Windows, so it never was a problem.

mrp04 said,

So? You bought a Microsoft Product (Windows) which includes Microsoft Internet Explorer, whose default search engine is Microsoft Bing. If you get one of Google's prodcuts (Chrome), its default search engine is Google.
Apple's product (OS X) comes with Safari, Apple's browser. Since they don't have their own search engine, the default is Google.

How is Microsoft Internet Explorer being included with Microsoft Windows a problem? It isn't, the EU just wanted some easy cash from Microsoft and wanted to try giving one of their own an advantage

Microsoft never has blocked anyone from installing their own browser on Windows, so it never was a problem.

we all saw this kind of arguments back then when there was a huge debate about EU's antitrust suit against Microsoft. you're a little late

M_Lyons10 said,
The ballot screen was Microsoft's idea to appease the EU after Opera's complaint and moaning... That was all.

Not just Opera's moaning, but also Mozilla and Google's moaning. Why are you only whining about Opera when Mozilla and Google were actively involved as well?

Opera also wanted Microsoft to change IE's logo because it is "Too recognizable". That's how ridiculous Opera's childish nonsense is...

No, Opera didn't want Microsoft to change IE's logo. It is you who are being ridiculous, childish, ignorant and hypocritical.

mrp04 said,
If you get one of Google's prodcuts (Chrome), its default search engine is Google.

Actually, the first time you start Chrome it shows you a Search Engine Ballot Screen where you can choose between Google, Bing, etc. IIRC, Google's own engine was to the far right on this selection screeen.

Apple's product (OS X) comes with Safari, Apple's browser.

Apple didn't break the law.

How is Microsoft Internet Explorer being included with Microsoft Windows a problem?

It isn't. The problem is that Microsoft didn't just do that, but they also broke the law. How about educating yourself before spouting nonsense?

the EU just wanted some easy cash from Microsoft and wanted to try giving one of their own an advantage

The EU didn't get a single penny from Microsoft.

Opera is not "one of EU's own" since Norway (where Opera is based) isn't even part of the EU. Furthermore, US companies like Google, Mozilla and Adobe were part of the complaint as well.

Your ignorance, hypocrisy and sheer dishonesty is truly shining through.

PreKe said,

Actually, the first time you start Chrome it shows you a Search Engine Ballot Screen where you can choose between Google, Bing, etc. IIRC, Google's own engine was to the far right on this selection screeen.


Apple didn't break the law.


It isn't. The problem is that Microsoft didn't just do that, but they also broke the law. How about educating yourself before spouting nonsense?


The EU didn't get a single penny from Microsoft.

Opera is not "one of EU's own" since Norway (where Opera is based) isn't even part of the EU. Furthermore, US companies like Google, Mozilla and Adobe were part of the complaint as well.

Your ignorance, hypocrisy and sheer dishonesty is truly shining through.

Please state, completely, how Microsoft broke the law in this case.
What did Microsoft do that Apple doesn't do with Safari?

resol612 said,

we all saw this kind of arguments back then when there was a huge debate about EU's antitrust suit against Microsoft. you're a little late


How is it any less valid? Just because the EU voted to screw Microsoft, doesn't make it right.

PreKe said,

What are you talking about?

The ballot screen was Microsoft's own idea. Opera had nothing to do with it.

Also, Mozilla and Google fully supported the ballot screen and encouraged its use.

So if anyone should be ashamed, it's ignorant people like you.

Nope. Microsoft first idea is to provide a version of Windows that doesn't have IE in it, just like Windows 7 N. When EU rejected it, Microsoft asked EU for a suggestion, and EU suggests that a ballot is included. You do not have to be a genius to realize who suggested the ballot feature to EU. Hint: some obscure company from Norway that produced a closed-source browser that also cannot compete the way the likes of Mozilla and Google has.

mrp04 said,
Please state, completely, how Microsoft broke the law in this case.
What did Microsoft do that Apple doesn't do with Safari?

So you admit that you are deeply ignorant of the basis of the case, and yet you continue to whine about it?

One basic difference here is that Apple does not have a monopoly, but Microsoft does. Microsoft abused its monopoly to undermine competition, which is illegal all over the world.

How is it any less valid? Just because the EU voted to screw Microsoft, doesn't make it right.

So enforcing the law is "screwing someone"? That's an extremely interesting claim. So when a bank robber is busted and thrown in jail he is "screwed by the authorities"! Poor guy!

asellus said,
Nope. Microsoft first idea is to provide a version of Windows that doesn't have IE in it, just like Windows 7 N. When EU rejected it, Microsoft asked EU for a suggestion, and EU suggests that a ballot is included. You do not have to be a genius to realize who suggested the ballot feature to EU. Hint: some obscure company from Norway that produced a closed-source browser that also cannot compete the way the likes of Mozilla and Google has.

No, the ballot screen was suggested by Microsoft.

And why are you dishonestly whining about Opera, when Google and Mozilla fully supported and backed both the antitrust case and the ballot screen?

PreKe said,

So you admit that you are deeply ignorant of the basis of the case, and yet you continue to whine about it?

One basic difference here is that Apple does not have a monopoly, but Microsoft does. Microsoft abused its monopoly to undermine competition, which is illegal all over the world.


So enforcing the law is "screwing someone"? That's an extremely interesting claim. So when a bank robber is busted and thrown in jail he is "screwed by the authorities"! Poor guy!

What a condescending Opera Fan. Opera is crap, and will never win, not even to Google Chrome. Google is the Internet Monopoly, and is the new "Anti-MS Hero". Not Opera. Opera can curl up and bury itself, the future belongs to Chrome and Firefox.

thenonhacker said,
What a condescending Opera Fan. Opera is crap, and will never win, not even to Google Chrome. Google is the Internet Monopoly, and is the new "Anti-MS Hero". Not Opera. Opera can curl up and bury itself, the future belongs to Chrome and Firefox.

There's no "win" or "lose" here. Any number of browsers can survive and thrive in the market. In fact, Opera is the #1 mobile browser.

And Opera has more than doubled its desktop user base in the last couple of years. On all of its browsers, Opera has more than 140 million users in total. Opera has been around for more than 15 years, and is bigger and stronger than ever. And profitable. It isn't going away any time soon. And what would the other browsers do if they didn't have Opera around to invent new features?

Anyway, your anti-Opera whining is getting a bit old.

Why aren't you whining about Google's antitrust complaints against Microsoft?

Why aren't you whining about Microsoft's antitrust complaints against Google?

Why aren't you whining about Google and Mozilla's heavy involvement and full support in the EU antitrust case?

Are antitrust complaints only bad when a small company does it?

mrp04 said,

So? You bought a Microsoft Product (Windows) which includes Microsoft Internet Explorer, whose default search engine is Microsoft Bing. If you get one of Google's prodcuts (Chrome), its default search engine is Google.
Apple's product (OS X) comes with Safari, Apple's browser. Since they don't have their own search engine, the default is Google.

How is Microsoft Internet Explorer being included with Microsoft Windows a problem? It isn't, the EU just wanted some easy cash from Microsoft and wanted to try giving one of their own an advantage

Microsoft never has blocked anyone from installing their own browser on Windows, so it never was a problem.

None of the products from Microsoft you mentioned have Microsoft in their name... Especially IE, it was switched from Microsoft Internet Explorer to Windows Internet Explorer to signify it only running on Windows. Microsoft Bing?! Seriously? Omg, that's the worst! Such an awesome product that has advertising and branding separating it from Microsoft and making itself stand out, and you call it Microsoft Bing?! That's like calling Xbox Live, Microsoft Xbox Live... I cannot stand when people say on TV or radio, Microsoft XP or Microsoft Vista. No, no, no!!!

PreKe said,

There's no "win" or "lose" here. Any number of browsers can survive and thrive in the market. In fact, Opera is the #1 mobile browser.

Umm, no. Google Android's version of Google Chrome will beat Opera any day.

Wonder what the effect of IE9 will have when it hits later, should be interesting to say the least. As for the ballot screen, everyone said it was a waste of time, this just proves it.

GP007 said,
Wonder what the effect of IE9 will have when it hits later, should be interesting to say the least.
According to Net Market Share IE9 Beta 1 already holds 0.10% of a market which is tremendous for a first Beta.
Microsoft is losing share because of IE6 and IE7. The fact article does not mention, is that IE8 is the fastest growing browser in the world. It has risen more than 6.69% since January 2010! So things look bright for IE9 and hence Bing, to say the least.

FMH said,
IE8 is the fastest growing browser in the world. It has risen more than 6.69% since January 2010! So things look bright for IE9 and hence Bing, to say the least.

People upgrading from older version doesn't mean that it'll continue to grow past the IE total user base, though.

According to statcounter's worldwide statistics, IE8 has plateaued and IE6 and IE7 continue to fall.

I have to say though that statcounter has reported low results for IE compared to other statistics sites for as long that I can remember. I can only think that statcounter is used by sites that have fewer IE users using them. Still, it's valuable to look at the trends.

You mean the European Court, right? DOJ is from the States. This is talking about the effect of the browser ballot screen, which is only used in Europe.

devHead said,
You mean the European Court, right? DOJ is from the States. This is talking about the effect of the browser ballot screen, which is only used in Europe.

Well, it stands to reason that if people had actually been affected at large by Internet Explorer's bundling with Windows that the effect would have been visible equally well in Europe as in the United States.

DonC said,
I guess this means the Department of Justice were wrong after all...

I'd rather use Firefox than Opera. Or Chrome than Opera.
So how can Opera expect me to like it over IE?

European Union should generate new excuses for Opera now!

thenonhacker said,
European Union should generate new excuses for Opera now!

I find it odd that you are only whining about Opera, considering that the ballot screen was Microsoft's own idea, and it was fully supported by both Mozilla and Google.

I wouldn't worry about Opera either. Opera Mini doubles its user base every year, and the desktop version has doubled its user base in the last two years as well.

thenonhacker said,

I'd rather use Firefox than Opera. Or Chrome than Opera.
So how can Opera expect me to like it over IE?

European Union should generate new excuses for Opera now!

It was only a matter of time before someone blamed Opera. Little do you know.

thenonhacker said,

I'd rather use Firefox than Opera. Or Chrome than Opera.
So how can Opera expect me to like it over IE?

European Union should generate new excuses for Opera now!

Yeah, I have to agree. I use Opera on my WinMo device because IE in 6.1 is horrible, but once I get WP7 I won't be using Opera any longer. And as for the desktop version of Opera, I am far from a fan...

M_Lyons10 said,
Yeah, I have to agree. I use Opera on my WinMo device because IE in 6.1 is horrible, but once I get WP7 I won't be using Opera any longer. And as for the desktop version of Opera, I am far from a fan...

How is your personal choice of browsers relevant to the topic, exactly?

PreKe said,

How is your personal choice of browsers relevant to the topic, exactly?

Relevant, because the ballot is about you and me and them, the voters of default browsers.

BTW, with or without the ballot screen, I wouldn't use IE, I love Firefox and its rich set of add-ons.

thenonhacker said,
Relevant, because the ballot is about you and me and them, the voters of default browsers.

No, it's irrelevant because this is about the ballot screen, not about what some random troll is using.

PreKe said,

No, it's irrelevant because this is about the ballot screen, not about what some random troll is using.

No it's relevant, because of some obvious Opera Apologist got hurt.