Opera Files EU Complaint Against Microsoft

A number of readers have sent word about Opera Software ASA's antitrust complaint against Microsoft filed with the EU. Here is Opera's press release on the filing. The company wants the EU to "obligate Microsoft to unbundle Internet Explorer from Windows and/or carry alternative browsers pre-installed on the desktop" and to "require Microsoft to follow fundamental and open Web standards accepted by the Web-authoring communities." The latter request makes this a case to watch. Will the Commissioner take the Acid2 test using IE7?

Comments

Re:I don't get it

[Sparks23]

Mac OS X does come with Safari bundled, yes. However, Safari and Konqueror are in many ways the same browser; both are based on the open source WebKit, and it is possible for a user to compile a new copy of WebKit and replace Safari. (Witness the nightly builds at the Surfin' Safari blog, for instance.)

The issue I have usually heard from a web-design standpoint is that Internet Explorer is the only pre-installed option on Windows (meaning many people never bother to switch to another browser), is not remotely standards compliant (meaning web designers have to do all kinds of fun workarounds for IE compatibility) and is not open source, so (unlike the Linux and OS X situations) industrious end-users cannot simply go in and fix any HTML/CSS standards compliance bugs in the default-browser-flavor themselves.

That's how I read the Opera suit, though admittedly only one possible interpretation... "either make your browser play nice with the rest of the world, or offer other default browsers that do."

Re:I'm not sure this case is a good thing at all

[Poingggg]

I would be very disturbed if the standards element of the lawsuit (assuming the summary given is accurate) gets anywhere. That would imply that the recommendation of a group of unelected people in a self-appointed standards body can legally compel an organisation with 80+% market share to change anything about how its wildly successful product works to benefit inferior (according to the market) competitors. What legal or ethical basis is there for such compulsion?

If the 80% marketshare of a totally inferior product is made by screwing up open standards to closed, one-'browser'-only-usable ones, thus pushing other browsers out of the market by including this inferior product in a monopolised OS, I think I can see the unethical part of this.

If Microsoft would have kept to standards and then got an 80% marketshare, in a honest competition with the rest of the market, it would be a totally different story. It is not as if MS had a big marketshare and someone came up with altered standards to thwart them, but the standards were there before MS decided to alter them for their own purposes and made it impossible for others to use their (MS's) 'standards'.

Disclaimer: I am not a web-developer, and don't even play one on tv.