Slashdot Mirror
EU Wants Multiple Browser Bundling On New PCs
An anonymous reader writes with a link to Ars Technica's report that "the EU is considering forcing Windows users to choose a browser to download and install before they can first browse the Internet, according to The Wall Street Journal (subscription required). While the latest Windows 7 builds let you uninstall IE8, 'third-party browser makers like Opera, Mozilla and Google are pushing for tough sanctions against Microsoft. The EU would rather have a "ballot screen" for users to choose which browsers to download and install as well as which one to set as default. The bundling requirement might end up becoming a responsibility for manufacturers.'"
Microsoft's rules do not disallow OEMs bundling browsers.
Believe it or not.
Not anymore, but back when Netscape and IE were slugging it out it sure did. MS was threatening to pull Windows out from under any OEM that bundled Netscape with a new PC.
Advertising revenue. Look up how Mozilla Corporation makes money from partnerships with, possibly among others, Google.
1. google for this: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124362706194767281.html 2. click on 1st link 3. no paywall if you come from google
Win7 lets you remove iexplore.exe but not Trident's libraries (the rendering engine).
$ make available
The Mozilla Foundation makes many tens of millions of dollars from Google. If nobody installs Firefox, Google isn't going to be giving them that kind of money anymore.
The anti-competitive behavior is not the bundling of IE itself, but rather the conditions Microsoft imposed upon OEMs who wished to install/default to other browsers. It has at times entirely disallowed other browsers and at others given a substantial discount for making IE the only/default browser on new systems.
I don't know to what extent this crap is still the case today.
The United States of America: We do what we must because we can.
Microsoft wasn't doing anything wrong bundling IE in the 90's and they're not doing anything wrong now.
Yeah, except for breaking antitrust law and undermining the operation of the free market in a way that almost certainly is responsible for the fact that Web technologies have almost completely stopped advancing for the last decade.
Now that Google has its own platform in Chrome why does it need Mozilla?
Good point. However..
1) Market share. Chrome doesn't have that many takers yet in the greater scheme of things. A lot of people use Firefox. Most of those go to Firefox-ised Google as their default homepage. Not to be sniffed at.
2) Goodwill by association. Firefox is good and open source and people like it. Never hurts.
Suppose Chrome get to 70% of the browser market, Firefox 20% and the rest 10%. 20% (ish) of people going to Google as their homepage (by default) is still something you want. Yes.
If you were literate, you might understand that no one is requiring Microsoft to support other browsers. Microsoft is being required to make options available.
Why is this Microsoft's problem and not that of the OEMs selling the computers ?
Because Microsoft made it their problem when they dictated to OEMs what software will and will not be included on shipping computers. Abusing a monopoly ring a bell? These facts are ancient history now so I find it hard to believe your ingnorance is not intentional.
This is not market regulation. It is enforcement of the law following a complaint of Opera. As simple as that. Microsoft fooled the Commission once with a soft remedy in the media player case, so the Commission won't let that happen a second time and be more specific.