EU Could Force Bundling Firefox With Windows

Barence writes "The European Commission could force Microsoft to bundle Firefox with future versions of Windows. The revelation came as part of Microsoft's quarterly filing with the Security and Exchange Commission. Among the statements is a clause outlining the penalties being considered by the European watchdog, which recently ruled that Microsoft is harming competition by bundling Internet Explorer with Windows. The most interesting situation outlined in the filing would see either Microsoft or computer manufacturers forced to install Firefox, Chrome, Opera and Safari by default alongside Internet Explorer on new Windows-based PCs."

Comments

And What of the Others?

[eldavojohn]

The most interesting situation outlined in the filing would see either Microsoft or computer manufacturers forced to install Firefox, Chrome, Opera and Safari by default alongside Internet Explorer on new Windows-based PCs.

What about Maxthon, Flock, Amaya, SeaMonkey or Avant Browser? And that's just to name a few ...

I think you're kind of riding a slippery slope with this mentality--how could another browser (like Firefox's rise to marketshare) ever make it now that the top few are being bundled? You're not fixing anything. I would argue that they shouldn't release it with any browsers default installed and instead give them a package manager (similar to many Linux distributions) that allows them to step through a wizard process to download browsers from trusted sources based on an ever changing list (or conf file if they really want to change that).

Re:And What of the Others?

[Frag-A-Muffin]

I would argue that they shouldn't release it with any browsers default installed and instead give them a package manager (similar to many Linux distributions) that allows them to step through a wizard process to download browsers from trusted sources based on an ever changing list (or conf file if they really want to change that).

Right. Cause this is oh-so-user-friendly. If you were to ask 1000 "regular computer users", I'd bet over 50% wouldn't even know what a browser is. They think their computer *IS* the internet!

The only real solution is to let the VAR (ie. dell, hp, compaq, gateway, etc. etc.) bundle whatever they want. (which is what they've wanted to do for a while, but couldn't, else they'd get hit for higher prices for their OEM deals on the 'doze licenses)

Re:And What of the Others?

[Chyeld]

Well, lets see.

Maxthon and Avant are based on the Trident Layout Engine built into Windows. So including them in the list wouldn't exactly resolve the "You are forcing IE on people" complaint. While they do have their own code base, it's still based on the same engine from Microsoft.

Amaya is a test bed application for the W3C, I'm sure it's lovely for the few people who use it as their main browser, but it's not exactly what you'd foist onto the general poplulace.

Flock and SeaMonkey are both based on Mozilla (aka Firefox). And while they add value to the Firefox proposition, if the point is to provide an alternative to IE then both of them are 'over qualified'.

And while I agree with the arguement that a solution would be to not ship with anything installed and simply install their own, there are numerous disadvantages to that that you are overlooking. Such as the fact that most people new computers aren't going to know which one they want and simply pick the top one on the list. Who do you think that's going to be?

In fact, while I also agree that if this happens and the list is codified as the summary and article presents, it would hamper new comers, the truth is that covering the 'top' browsers also covers the top engines that 90% of the rest of the crowd use anyway.

Re:And What of the Others?

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

How does this action satisfy the Opera folks who requested it?

It doesn't completely, but it does help them significantly. Bundling Firefox with Windows means developers can count on all new machines shipping with a reasonably standards compliant browser and they can instruct people on how to switch to using it if they visit a age using IE without them having to download and install software. This promotes standards on the Web and means Opera can start spending less development money on working around the intentionally broken Web and more making real improvements to their products. If you recall, intentionally subverted standards were a big part of Opera's complaint.

Re:And What of the Others?

[ianare]

I know this gets brought up ad nauseam, but it is pertinent to your comments : MS is a monopoly, and as such is regulated by a different set of rules and standards.

NOT regulating a monopoly leads to disastrous consequences for all involved.

Re:And What of the Others?

[oldspewey]

Seeing IE's market share drop is always nice for clueful web devs.

Fixed that for you.

I know plenty of web developers who create horrible, broken pages because they render nicely on IE. When I say something along the lines of "you're not even close to being XHTML complaint" they respond with something along the lines of "I hate Firefox! I can never get my layouts to look nice."

Re:And What of the Others?

[oldspewey]

Come to think of it, it would be poetic if all the EU member states rewrote every single one of their government web pages in order to make them all 100% XHTML 1.0 Strict ... every government service, every government program, every application form, every information page, hopelessly inaccessible unless you are using a browser that actually renders properly.

Never mind forcing MS to bundle a different browser. Force them to follow standards.

Re:And What of the Others?

[MindlessAutomata]

The truth is people here want to cripple Windows to boost Linux adoption.

Re:And What of the Others?

[jedidiah]

> Go get your browser packaged in an operating system by virtue of it's quality, not by virtue of law.

That never stopped Internet Explorer.

Of course this is precisely what Opera is "whining" about.

Microsoft bundled a web browser specifically to kill the market.
This makes the whole web browser situation different then any
other slippery slope example you could conjure up.

Re:And What of the Others?

[AK Marc]

It would require removing the Windows file manager too, because that can resolve URLs.

Or, require Windows to enforce the "default browser" setting. I've had Microsoft products (occasionally from Office and all the time from explorer) open something in something other than my default browser. And that "other" is always IE (or Microsoft's IE engine, if not technically IE itself). What's the point of offering a "default" setting if they constantly ignore it? That alone should be sufficient to show that they force use of bundled software against the user's wishes.

compatible

[cekander]

As a web developer, all I want is for MS to make IE compatible with standards. I'm sick of giving their browser special treatment, and I wouldn't if it didn't represent over 50% of my users.

I feel the EU's efforts would be better focused on this issue instead. I think MS consciously chooses to keep IE incompatible with the standards so that sites developed for IE don't work in other browsers that are standards compliant. It's a monopolistic abuse of power.

Astroturfing?

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Okay, I'm really concerned. In the last three or four articles we've seen on this topic, we see dozens of posts all repeating the same nonsense that was debunked in the first discussion. Every time the topic comes up people immediately reference legal bundling by other companies (OS X and Safari or Linux and Mplayer). Are people really so incapable of learning and ignorant that they don't understand even the most basic aspects of antitrust abuse? And they all did not see any of the umpteen explanations in previous discussions?

I'm beginning to hope there is some serious astroturfing going on because the alternative is worse.

Re:Yeah, like that will work.

[hkmwbz]

To have Opera claim MS "monopoly" excludes them is ludicrous

Actually, Opera's claim is not specifically about Opera. It's about Microsoft breaking the law, which affects everyone, not just Opera.

would never have known of them except because of the lawsuit.

Opera didn't sue anyone. It is not a lawsuit. Opera simply reported Microsoft's violation of the law to the authorities, similar to what you would do if you witnessed a robbery.

We can't succeed on our own

Opera is currently the dominant mobile browser. Opera Software is experiencing massive growth in every single business segment (including the desktop version) every single quarter, is profitable, and has a large pile of cash saved up.

we can force our way onto millions of PC, whether or not people actually want our stuff

So it's OK for Microsoft to illegally force themselves on people, but it is not OK for someone to protest? Opera never made any demands to be forced on anyone. Opera simply wants actual competition.

I know, lets go after iPhones next because its not fair that Apple has a monopoly there.

Your whole comment demonstrates your lack of knowledge and understanding of the matter. You are ignorant, and are spreading FUD about Opera. This last comment of yours shows that you are either extremely ignorant or extremely dishonest. Apple/iPhone is not a monopoly, and certainly not an illegal one.