I maybe wrong? MS developed IE?

I thought they brought it, hacked, ruined, and published within an OS?

Developed is a STRONG & WRONG word I feel.

...unless any potential fine is a significant percentage of Microsoft's underlying asset value. If not, they'll just grin and bear it to maintain their (near) monopoly. Consider; if they get fined a billion Euros every three years as a result of successive actions they can easily cope.

Also the litigation process is so slow with appeal after appeal that they can do what they want to because any retribution will be years away.

The European Parliament is the highest authority in Europe. I think that if they're sufficiently pissed off and want decisive immediate action, then order the break up of Microsoft in Europe.

Break them and let the heavens fall.

it's not as if chrome is going to catch on anyway. how many users actually use chrome after installing it? me i just went back to good ol firefox.

How does MS exactly "play fair" with this? Bundle every browser on the planet with their OS and let users pick from a daunting list (with IE conveniently placed at the top, and the biggest competitors such as Firefox and Safari at the bottom), or at least provide a list of mirrors for each of these that their selection app then fetches? (The user wouldn't be able to go get one themselves, having no E. Unless Windblows has a native wget utility?)

Bunches of Linux distros just stick Firefox as the browser, with wget and sometimes links or lynx ready in the shell, and the user can go get a different one online or through the package manager if they like. So it should be with MS. Sure they have an advantage, but that's about all they have going for them with IE usage. Keep making the browser loads better than IE; MS will improve IE by copying the ideas to keep the masses from flocking away (tabs!), there's the competition to do something better and innovative.

Surely, by applying the same logic, Apple is equally guilty since Safari is bundled with its OS?

Apple will argue that they do this because MS abandoned IE on the Mac several years ago, so need to supply a replacement. However, by bundling their own browser in exactly the same way as MS, what's good for the goose is good for the gander (maybe that should be 'bad for the goose....').

As a user of Macs for over 20 years, I am obviously pro the Apple platform, but it does not stop me from pointing out the parallels. Nor for stating that Firefox is, IMHO, a much better and safer alternative.

Apple can and have bundle itunes with quicktime, OSX with safari, and effectively lock everyone without an ipod/phone out of their itunes store since the dawn of time, when it began back in the 70's.

Personally I think it's about time Microsoft fucked off the EU altogether and ceased all sales of licenses sold here in this over-controlled big brother state we live in and rendered all licenses void. 500 million euro fine for bundling Windows Media Player with Windows? Fuck right off.

Watch the outcry and the single applaud coming from me.

Paris, because she gets screwed just as hard as Microsoft.

The Council of the EU is the highest authority in Europe, and this article is about regulators from the European Commission, not the European Parliament.

Mine's the blue one with 12 gold stars on.

Neither the Linux distro's or Apple are using their monopoly in one area to illegal distort the market in another.

OK, so I download my favourite distro and install it, bet there's no browser software bundled with it 'cause it's anti-competitive, how the hell do I get onto filehippo to download a browser?

If the EU wants to be force a fair market, there is a very simple way.

Just permit the EU to switch the browsers around. If Microsoft insists upon bundling a browser, let the EU decide which one it is. Or, change it from time to time.

Microsoft must believe that is fair, right? They will get their rotation. And so will Google and Mozilla.

Or, do not bundle any of them and require Microsoft to compete just like everyone else does. You can offer downloads or you can box it up.

Only fools think they must be able to force the distribution of their crap.

Can you imagine Ballmer being told that he had to distribute Firefox or Chrome!!!

Priceless.

oh please god make it so...

[maniacal gales of laughter]

-----------------

The cherry on the top is to address the previously sold MS OS’s in the EU.

MS to use their Update Service to offer this as a Critical Update (This is valid, as it is at least as critical as WGA).

This would need to be offered to any one in the EU

-----------------

Is it just me - I can't managed to even get Firefox to be my default browser - Windows Live Messenger still fires up IE if I have a new hotmail email. I also think IE is what's behind the file explorer.

Sure, you can offer a choice on installing Windows, but it'll take some engineering and somewhere within the OS there will be elements of IE.

I'm sure someone else can comment wit authority on the level of tight integration of IE within XP/Vista...

I prefer Firefox and if the new Safari is indeed much faster than Firefox I'd like to try it...

Nokia S60 does not allow you to change your default browser from the Nokia product. It's a good product, but I much prefer Opera Mini. I have no way to have email links fire off Opera Mini currently.

I'm curious to hear what the Anti-M$ crowd has to say when MS is replaced with Nokia.

Personally, I am for choices in my browser, but believe the free market should push OS manufacturers by demand not by legislation. Don't like it, don't buy it. As Android matures I will move from Symbian to Android most likely and currently I'm using Ubuntu.