Opera Software files EU antitrust complaint against Microsoft

[Xerxes]

Excuse me for been silly, but wouldn't forcing MS to make IE standards compliant, break a significant portion of the web? I'm mean seriously, there is a truck load of sites that rely on IE's lack of stands and while many sites will work fine regardless, many others won't. Not to mention quite alot of businesses that have websites etc custom built for IE...I think part of the reason why MS doesn't seem to care about been more standards compliant, is because in a way they can't..well not all at once, they'd need to do it gradually realistically. Maybe I got it all wrong but I thought I'd just throw in my ideas anyway.

[tiagosilva29]

Topic@Groklaw

apparently you can if your the EU :p

Yes, sir.

Excuse me for been silly, but wouldn't forcing MS to make IE standards compliant, break a significant portion of the web? I'm mean seriously, there is a truck load of sites that rely on IE's lack of stands and while many sites will work fine regardless, many others won't. Not to mention quite alot of businesses that have websites etc custom built for IE...I think part of the reason why MS doesn't seem to care about been more standards compliant, is because in a way they can't..well not all at once, they'd need to do it gradually realistically. Maybe I got it all wrong but I thought I'd just throw in my ideas anyway.

Prior to something exist, there's always chaos. And in this matter, you need chaos to lead you to the proper way.

Excuse me for being silly, but should webdevelopers do what they're supposed to do? Websites custom built for IE? This isn't Korea, and even they will eventually change it.

Neowin's going to PunBB with PNG, SVG and MathML! For the Emperor!

Edited December 14, 2007 by tiagosilva29

[d_ralphie]

Excuse me for been silly, but wouldn't forcing MS to make IE standards compliant, break a significant portion of the web?

this wouldn't happen overnight. it would, however, prevent microsoft from continuing to break the standards of the future in particular, like ecmascript 4 which microsoft would rather replace with silverlight/c#.

[ichi]

there is a truck load of sites that rely on IE's lack of stands and while many sites will work fine regardless, many others won't. Not to mention quite alot of businesses that have websites etc custom built for IE...I think part of the reason why MS doesn't seem to care about been more standards compliant, is because in a way they can't..well not all at once, they'd need to do it gradually realistically.

IE's "lack of standards" isn't even consistent across all IE versions.

Regarding backwards compatibility (with broken webs) it doesn't really matter if next IE versions work towards open standards or a whole new level of deviations.

[RedFlow]

I don't mind having IE on here. It's great for people that aren't advanced in computers. I personally am a FireFox user but I don't have anything against IE.

[Punio4]

What I don't get is all you people saying that another browser should be preinstelled from the OEM vendor.

I have never in my entire life bought a prebuilt configuration + OS. Retail owns.

What about those people?

You format your harddrive. Reinstall windows. And... You want to use Opera. What are you going to download it with? Ask a friend to give you the installation on an USB stick?

IE should stay, and so should WMP. As should Safari and iTunes. And Firefox and Rhythmbox.

What's next? A lawsuit vs Nokia telling it to remove it's web browser and media player?

If this sh*t continues, the only thing that should be included on the windows installer cd would be the kernel and clock.avi.

After the lawsuit by Aston Desktop and Stardock that people should choose the shell and GUI, and that MS is having a GUI monopoly.

[dysmatik]

:huh:

[d_ralphie]

What I don't get is all you people saying that another browser should be preinstelled from the OEM vendor.

this is irrelevant. there are all sorts of solutions. why focus so much on this tiny and insignificant issue?

the more important issue is microsoft's violation of standards.

What's next? A lawsuit vs Nokia telling it to remove it's web browser and media player?

nokia does not command 80-90% of the market. it has many competitors, and nokia actually promotes open standards by using webkit, which is amazingly standards compliant.

If this sh*t continues, the only thing that should be included on the windows installer cd would be the kernel and clock.avi.

this is obviously nonsense, as it must be shown that microsoft has violated antitrust laws.

in the case of browsers, microsoft has actively sabotaged open standards.

but again, stop talking about the bundling issue, as there is a second and more important part of the complaint, namely forcing microsoft to follow standards.

unbundling msie simply means that you give microsoft less of a leverage to use vendor lock-in and ignore standards.

[Rablet]

If this sh*t continues, the only thing that should be included on the windows installer cd would be the kernel and clock.avi.

After the lawsuit by Aston Desktop and Stardock that people should choose the shell and GUI, and that MS is having a GUI monopoly.

Now that would be awesome! No more need for nLite if that happened ;)

Go Opera!

[xfodder]

It also wants it to require Microsoft to adhere to industry standards with its Web browser.The issue of standards is seen as important because if all Web browsers do not use the same standards, Web site developers are likely to design their Web sites to work with the most widely-used browser, which is Internet Explorer.

i don't care about IE being bundled, but please MAKE THEM CONFORM TO THE STANDARDS! every other browser passes the acid2 test (firefox beta3 now does) except IE ... i dont understand why microsoft thinks it is above everyone else and dont need to comply! bloody microsoft

[shakey_snake]

i don't care about IE being bundled, but please MAKE THEM CONFORM TO THE STANDARDS! every other browser passes the acid2 test (firefox beta3 now does) except IE ... i dont understand why microsoft thinks it is above everyone else and dont need to comply! bloody microsoft

Um... firefox3 beta 2 is only in release candidate status. I believe you mean firefox3 beta, not firefox beta3

[FlibbyFlobby]

I think people are forgetting these two issues go hand-in-hand. If Microsoft had adhered to open standards early in the life of IE there wouldn't have been a problem, but they didn't. Whilst they shouldn't have to unbundle IE from Windows, they should be forced to adhere to open standards for the benefit of the masses,whether or not they like it.

[xpgeek]

Should IE be forced to work on conforming to some damn web standards already? Definitely! Should Microsoft be forced to "unbundle" IE from Windows entirely? No, thats freakin stupid.

The obvious question, which is a good one, if Windows didn't come with a browser pre-installed, then how exactly would your average PC user get to Opera.com, or Mozilla.com, to download an alternative browser anyway?

And yes, OEM PC manufacturers are free to include an alternative browser and even set it as the default already, they are not allowed to remove IE tho because like it or not it IS actually an integral part of the OS, but they are still free to hide it if they wanted to. They don't, because like it or not the vast majority of new OEM PC buyers are not all that tech savvy, and they'd just wind up calling tech support and asking where the blue E is.

Opera had their chance to take on IE, and they made too many mistakes over the years in their campaign to do it, if you ask me. Mistake number 1 was that it wasn't even a free browser for a very long time. Average not that tech savvy PC users : "Why the hell should I pay for this when my Windows already has a browser". The only reason Opera even became free, and they say it was a different reason of course, but come on, we know, the only reason they went free is because Firefox was free, and had already wayy surpassed Opera's marketshare. They had to go free to have any hope of still competing at all.

And mistake number 2 is they've just been too restrictive with the code. Theres no Google toolbar for Opera, theres no Yahoo toolbar for Opera, theres no RoboForm plugin for Opera, theres no anything except pieces of javascript code that you have to have at least a little tech savvy'ness to use anyway.

Sorry Opera, I respect you as a browser, I really do, but you had your shot, and blew it. Sorry you didn't become as successful as Firefox. Don't be a crybaby now and just sue.

[Quillz]

Why do people come against Microsoft (only reason is market share), didnt Mac bundle Safari?

A big difference is that you can't remove IE from Windows, yet you can very easily remove Safari from OS X.

[osirisX]

No IE means no way to download Opera out of the box. Seems a bit counterproductive to Opera if users can't get it. The second complaint is a valid one though.

[ichi]

No IE means no way to download Opera out of the box. Seems a bit counterproductive to Opera if users can't get it.

I guess that a Windows version without IE would be a OEM only version (like Windows N), so there's no issue because it's the OEM who would install the browser.

[petroid]

I don't have a choice of Firefox or Internet Explorer on my Wii, all I have is Opera. I don't see why Opera technology (not just for the browser but also the Shop channel uses it) can come with the Wii, Safari can come with Mac OS X and so on if Internet Explorer can't come with Windows.

[jwjw1]

LOL...what are these people going to want next....force car manufactures to unbundle the 'steering wheel' 'tires' and few 'engine parts' so others can have fair competition...another company wanting to be added to Microsoft 'child support' payments.

[ichi]

I don't have a choice of Firefox or Internet Explorer on my Wii, all I have is Opera. I don't see why Opera technology (not just for the browser but also the Shop channel uses it) can come with the Wii, Safari can come with Mac OS X and so on if Internet Explorer can't come with Windows.

Because MS is abusing it's position on the OS market.

[libertas83]

Because MS is abusing it's position on the OS market.

In the 90s yes, today no. OEMs choose the default software and configuration options and has for quite some time.

[ichi]

In the 90s yes, today no. OEMs choose the default software and configuration options and has for quite some time.

Have you ever seen a windows box being sold with a browser other that IE? (let alone windows boxes with no IE, obviously).

IE is installed on at least 80% of the computers, and the web is broken already. Until the situation is normalized MS is still effectively taking advantage of their position.

[libertas83]

Have you ever seen a windows box being sold with a browser other that IE? (let alone windows boxes with no IE, obviously).

IE is installed on at least 80% of the computers, and the web is broken already. Until the situation is normalized MS is still effectively taking advantage of their position.

The web is not broken and if it is broken in your browser then it is browser's fault for not trying to be compatible with the broken websites. Microsoft did not create this situation on its own. Netscape was there right alongside. They both had those little icons for developers to put on the site that said optimized for IE or for Netscape and some had both. To pin this all on Microsoft is really stupid and shallow.

Second, the web will be broken if suddenly Microsoft had to release a standard compliant browser with no backwards compatibility. You are not going to get the billions of webpages out there to change in a year.

Note, I am a web developer too and know the pain of makiing sites work in both, but I do not blame Microsoft for all the problems. I do not forget history and how things came together as so many people do. The web was not well thought out to be what it is today. People took it and made something out of it after they saw the potential. That to me shows us that the power of this medium. Those who only want web standards are not thinking what will be lost if every browser had to adhere strictly to the standards and nothing else. You will lose innovation. No more flash, flex, silverlight, ajax, asp.net, php, jsp, java applets, and more undiscovered technologies. It may sound foolish to mention those techs, but with government regulation, who knows what will happen.

[ichi]

The web is not broken and if it is broken in your browser then it is browser's fault for not trying to be compatible with the broken websites.

Come on, with MS playing the "undocumented moving target" there's no way to be fully compatible unless you keep playing catch up forever. That's the kind of thing that qualifies as abuse.

[d_ralphie]

No IE means no way to download Opera out of the box.

opera is not asking for windows to come without any browsers. it is asking for real choice.

In the 90s yes, today no. OEMs choose the default software and configuration options and has for quite some time.

from the faq:

'While it is easy, at least for tech-savvy people, to install a different browser, many sites still require you to use MSIE due to their use of proprietary MS technologies supported only by IE, or hacks designed to fix IE's broken standards support, which can themselves break in other browsers. For there to be actual choice, Web users must be able to choose another browser and use it on any site they wish.'

The web is not broken and if it is broken in your browser then it is browser's fault for not trying to be compatible with the broken websites.

opera and mozilla have spent billions on trying to be compatible with broken websites. msie is still required for many sites. it is microsoft's fault for trying to prevent other browsers from being used.

Microsoft did not create this situation on its own.

yes it did, by actively trying to replace open standards with proprietary technologies and lock-in.

Second, the web will be broken if suddenly Microsoft had to release a standard compliant browser with no backwards compatibility.

this doesn't have to happen overnight. microsoft just has to stop destroying open standards and forcing its own crap on the web.

I do not forget history and how things came together as so many people do.

you forget that destroying the web has been a key strategy for microsoft. just look at the ecmascript4 mess:

http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roadmap/arc...ris_wilson.html

https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es4-disc...ber/001309.html

Those who only want web standards are not thinking what will be lost if every browser had to adhere strictly to the standards and nothing else. You will lose innovation.

nonsense. standards are the BASIS of innovation. without standards (http, tcp/ip, etc.) there would be no internet.

remember, if other browsers didn't have to spend a shitload of time figuring out how to work around microsoft's crap, standards could be implemented faster and better, and there would be even more room for innovations that worked everywhere.

[Chode]

I am a fan of Opera, but I do consider this complaint to be silly.

On the otherhand, I rather suspect that the majority of the posts in this thread would be positive and supporting it if rather it was Mozilla who had filed it...