Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Agrees To EU Browser Ballot Screen

Posted by kdawson on from the vote-early-and-often dept.

An anonymous reader sends in coverage from Ars Technica of Microsoft's capitulation to the EU, after European regulators requested that Redmond bundle multiple browsers on new PCs. "Microsoft has decided that the last thing it needs in this economy is some combination of the following: fines, legal bills, and a delay of Windows 7. It has offered to adopt the European Union's preferred solution for browser competition: a browser selector screen at startup."

61 of 438 comments (clear)

  1. Wimps by Slothrup · · Score: 4, Funny

    Go down fighting!

    --
    The difference between theory and practice is that, in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
    1. Re:Wimps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      The correct quote is: In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is.

      If you're going to bastardize it, at least make it something elegant: The difference between theory and practice is often much smaller in theory than in practice.

      Or even just remove the redundant part of your own version: The difference between theory and practice is that in theory, there is no difference.

      For Christ sake, you sound like a retard trying to explain quantum mechanics. "Cows are black and white except when they're brown, in which case they are not black and white because they're brown, unless you put them in a box and then you don't know what color it is unless you open the box which will reveal the color that the cow is, and it will either be black and white or else brown unless it could just be black, or else dead, but only because you looked at it. Anyway, cows have fur..."

    2. Re:Wimps by EvilBudMan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think they should have just been made to do what every other company does. Not a big M$ fan but who decides which browsers get to be on the ballot? This ain't 1996 and it's too late now. I would like to see more interoperability from the M$ servers and the clients. Like if you have a Windows server you can't afford to replace but want to replace your clients then you have to kludge things to get that to work. This really locks in small businesses to using their total solution. I guess Apple is the same in fact, but I don't know too many people that use their servers.

    3. Re:Wimps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You know, some of us have sig display turned off. Would you please quote what TF you're talking about. Otherwise you sound like a retard answering a question that no one's asked. This goes double in half a year, when your parent has changed his sig to "This is Bunny".

  2. In before the morons by cyber-vandal · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But but but......Apple and KDE and GNOME and Google don't have to bundle other browsers so the EU sucks and just wants to hurt a successful MERKIN company!!!!!

    1. Re:In before the morons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Apple and KDE are valid comparisons. Google would be soon too. They're just not as easy a target, nor as deep pocketed. How the EU can justify forcing MS to do it but not the others, I'm not sure, except by saying "MS has a larger market share." To which I say: So fucking what. A vertical monopoly is still a monopoly.

    2. Re:In before the morons by wizardforce · · Score: 2, Interesting

      perhaps MS should create a system GUI similar to synaptic that doesn't need a browser to download software like pretty much every GNU/Linux distro in use does. That way they can claim one more feature and be able to comply with the EU without bundling software. Each browser that wants to have a shot at it only needs to supply MS with a repo address and maybe a way of verifying software integrity [md5 at the least]

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    3. Re:In before the morons by markdavis · · Score: 2, Informative

      > I have a hard time fathoming why Microsoft would have to do this but not Apple...

      Because, for now, Microsoft is a huge, damaging monopoly that destroys competition, choice, and freedom. Apple is a tiny, non-damaging, single-area monopoly (for now). If Apple were to do the same thing (be forced to have no default browser), it wouldn't change anything. Plus, Apple doesn't design the OS around the browser like MS does.

      But requiring MS to do it- well, that means 90% of the market will have a browser choice from the get-go. I don't think it is all that much of a remedy (to being a damaging monopoly), and it is certainly "too little too late", but it does have a certain logic to it.

    4. Re:In before the morons by John+Betonschaar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd mod you up if I had points, I don't really get it either. It's a good thing if anti-competetive behaviour is punished but the whole browser story really is beating a dead horse. The EU is trailing reality by a few years again, just like when they forced Microsoft to release a Windows-N without Windows Media Player. All the poisoning Microsoft could have done to the market when it comes to media players is already in the past. There really isn't anything stopping you from installing alternate media players or browsers in WIndows, forcing file associations or whatever. As much as I'd love to see the world move away from Windows and Microsoft, I really don't see the point in making their life hard over media players or browsers right now.

      I expect the EU to be fining Microsoft for deliberately screwing up standardization of office document formats... In 2020...

    5. Re:In before the morons by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Informative

      >>>I have a hard time fathoming why Microsoft would have to do this but not Apple...

      For the same reason why the U.S. Government broke-apart AT&T but did not touch other telephone companies like Sprint or MCI. (Hint: AT&T had a near-monopoly and so too does MS.)

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    6. Re:In before the morons by ch33zm0ng3r · · Score: 2, Funny

      http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&=&q=define%3Amerkin&btnG=Google+Search

      ...I'll just leave this here...

    7. Re:In before the morons by quantumplacet · · Score: 3, Informative

      i dont think you get the point of antitrust legislation. It is not to set standards for all companies, it is to prevent massive companies from abusing their advantage to stifle competition. small companies are allowed to do pretty much whatever the hell they want, as simple market forces will determine their success. however, companies with a large enough market share gain the ability to control their own market forces and destroy all competition, hence the need for antitrust legislation to level the playing field back out. the reason the EU does not require Apple, Google, or KDE to do the same is simple, those companies don't have a monopoly on the OS market.

    8. Re:In before the morons by Tanktalus · · Score: 3, Informative

      Nope. And it's really quite simple to understand why.

      Microsoft, according to the EU findings (so whether we agree or not is moot), is a monopoly. That means they get to play by different rules to ensure that the free market continues to exist despite the monopoly. In the past, the US has forced companies to break up to break the monopoly, so forcing a browser choice seems relatively minor.

      Further, as a deterrent to further illegal actions (which, again, are only illegal because they're a monopoly - different rules and all that), there must be some sort of punishment. To be honest, forcing this seems like a hand-slap more than a punishment: the horse has already left the barn, why are they locking it now?

      Should Apple or Ubuntu ever manage to get an effective monopoly, then the same rules would apply to them. In the meantime, these rules only apply to Microsoft.

    9. Re:In before the morons by hairyfeet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes but they DO have a monopoly on personal media players and yet nobody has suggested that they should be forced to allow iPods to sync with WMP and Mediamonkey and Amarok and every other music software out there. Why Not? Didn't we see them just cut out Palm last week? Why aren't they being busted for their monopoly?

      MSFT owns the desktop, Apple owns the PMP market, and Google owns search. They should ALL be forced to play by different rules. While I don't give a shit about IE Apple has been just as big a douche with making sure newer versions of iPod don't play nice as MSFT has with crappy "standards" with IE. You can't just let one off the hook because you like mock turtlenecks and boutique styling.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    10. Re:In before the morons by wizardforce · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think the real gripe with MS bundling IE was that 1) upgrades often force it to be the default overriding the user 2) it can not be completely removed 3) windows update and IE [the reason for windizupdate's existence] I'm pretty sure most of the problem could be dealt with if MS 1) allowed the complete removal of varying kinds of bundled software 2) offer the user to download alternatives before anything else

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    11. Re:In before the morons by kamatsu · · Score: 2, Informative

      Opera is not ad supported and hasn't been for a while now.

    12. Re:In before the morons by the_womble · · Score: 4, Informative

      Google is, so Apple and so does Intel

      Note that having a monopoly is not illegal - abusing it is. The fines and other actions taken against different companies reflect the extent to which they abused monopolies.

    13. Re:In before the morons by cyber-vandal · · Score: 2, Informative

      Are you saying that criminals shouldn't be punished just because it was a long time ago? I agree that the remedy is probably pointless since it won't really deter MS from future misbehaviour and it won't remove the applications barrier to entry that keeps them where they are, but to say MS should get off scot-free just because things have changed is a bit of a slap in the face to those companies and individuals that were hurt by MS's illegal behaviour.

    14. Re:In before the morons by jez9999 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      MS aren't a successful merkin company. This is a successful merkin company.

      --
      == Jez ==
      Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
    15. Re:In before the morons by marsu_k · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Oh yes, bleeding-edge W3C specs. Like CSS level 2, which was released in... 1998! Yes, I'm aware of CSS 2.1. I'm aware MS supposedly supports it. Yet 99% of the time, IE (in its various incarnations, this includes IE8 as well) is the only browser that gives me headaches when developing cross-browser sites. I really wish it would die a already.

    16. Re:In before the morons by hkmwbz · · Score: 2, Informative

      They are being "picked on" because they illegally abused their dominant position. Just like other criminals are being "picked on", poor things. Evil government, "picking on" innocent criminals like that.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
    17. Re:In before the morons by hkmwbz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not to mention they are beating a dead horse.

      Not at all. Their violations of the law have continued to this day.

      We have seen in version after version the share for IE erode since the days of IE6

      Yeah, but not because Microsoft isn't breaking the law and abusing the market, as Mozilla points out:

      "When the only real competition comes from a not for profit open source organization that depends on volunteers for almost half of its work product and nearly all of its marketing and distribution, while more than half a dozen other "traditional" browser vendors with better than I.E. products have had near-zero success encroaching on Microsoft I.E.'s dominance, there's a demonstrable tilt to the playing field. That tilt comes with the distribution channel - default status for the OS bundled Web browser.

      Frankly I honestly don't think it is gonna matter what MSFT does one way or the other anymore, the EU is gonna keep hitting them up for big fat checks.

      You are an idiot. Microsoft broke the law. Don't whine about laws being enforced by the government.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
    18. Re:In before the morons by hkmwbz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's a good thing if anti-competetive behaviour is punished but the whole browser story really is beating a dead horse. The EU is trailing reality by a few years

      Actually, Microsoft has been violating competition law to this day.

      As much as I'd love to see the world move away from Windows and Microsoft, I really don't see the point in making their life hard over media players or browsers right now.

      So what you are saying that breaking the law should have no consequences?

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
  3. IE will still dominate by gstep · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My guess is most people will still choose to use Internet Explorer, unless they already use Firefox/Chrome/Safari or whatever. People like what they're used to, even when it's crap. I try hard to convince people to stop using Internet Exploder but they always tell me they like it because it's what they know.

    1. Re:IE will still dominate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm sure Microsoft is hiring engineers from Diebold to implement the ballot. No matter what you click on you will have a 90% chance of getting IE. The interesting thing is that there will only be a 90% chance of installing IE if you click on IE.

    2. Re:IE will still dominate by godrik · · Score: 2, Interesting

      well, it clearly depends on where you are. I am living in the US for 6 month and I grew up in France. I would say that Firefox has a huge market share in France (To give an idea, I would say something like 70% of computer I looked at used firefox). I was petrified when I saw Firefox was almost unknown in the US.

      certainly people will have a different experience, but I really believe there is a difference. Have other people noticed something similar ?

    3. Re:IE will still dominate by MathiasRav · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm currently using IE7, [. . .] It. Is. Bad.

      I hate to ask this, but... why are you still using it?

    4. Re:IE will still dominate by clone53421 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Work, I'm guessing.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    5. Re:IE will still dominate by QuantumLeaper · · Score: 2, Funny

      Now if I could sell my Brother on Firefox, I could stop fixing his computer every few months because all the stuff IE installs, though that is not the whole problem, he tends to click yes whenever anything wants to install. I still remember when his Office kicked him off the network for having 1400 viruses, I told him he should take it out and shoot the computer so it would be out of its misery.

    6. Re:IE will still dominate by thebjorn · · Score: 3, Funny

      At the very least it will get them on a current version of IE. IE8 is actually pretty good. MS finally started improving their browser once they had some serious competition, and that's good for everyone regardless of what you use. Outdated IE users are bad for the whole internet.

      I don't mean to offend, really; but speaking as someone who does "web stuff" for a living - the only people that really believe "IE8 is actually pretty good" are people who don't know very much about what's possible even in the currently-defined HTML and CSS standards, or those that have never used anything except Internet Explorer.

      When I say IE8 is pretty good (or even "great") it's simply compared to previous versions of IE. I recently had a mini-nerdgasm when I fixed an IE7 bug in our dashboard application by inserting a browser check followed by a redirect to the IE8 download page ;-)

    7. Re:IE will still dominate by grimdonkey · · Score: 2, Informative

      Because, while being much superior to its previous versions, is still many miles away behind the other browsers.

      The difference might not be apparent to normal users, but the people working with it see that. It's slow, and it's coverage of current standards is horrible. IE is holding the web back for 10 years now, with great success, and IE8 walks the same path.

      As someone more eloquent put it: trust the geeks. And the web geeks have been chanting for 8 years now: IE is BAD, use something else, cause their monopoly is keeping the web from going further.

    8. Re:IE will still dominate by IntlHarvester · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But you're right. IE is still lacking in other areas, notably in the DOM implementation. Does IE8 even support HTML 2.0 link elements' navigational properties (table of contents, previous, next, up,...) yet?

      Does any browser support this? I've never seen it in use.

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
  4. I wonder what choices they will pick? by FictionPimp · · Score: 2, Funny

    I would select (if I was them)
    IE8
    safari (the first release for windows not the most recent)
    firefox 2 or maybe even a pre firefox name chanage release
    elinks
    and konq

    1. Re:I wonder what choices they will pick? by gbjbaanb · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If I was them (and I'm a nice person, so this comment is written purely as an exercise in evil :) I'd do it like they so the search provider option:

      Choose your internet browser:
          1. Microsoft Internet Explorer, optimised for Windows 7 (tm). Microsoft recommends IE8 for super-fast and safe internet surfing.
          2. A different browser. Note that Microsoft corporation has no control over other browser's safety, speed or features. Packages listed may not be as suitable for Windows 7 (tm) as other browsers, users may use one of these at their own risk.

      option 2 takes you to a list of alternatives, with another option to go with IE8 (of course)

    2. Re:I wonder what choices they will pick? by RLiegh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, looking at what they do with IE8, I think that you're almost right. To be accurate, what (IMO) is most likely is that when you install 7 you'll get a dialog box that says something like:

      Please set up your browser experience:
      1)Express setup (use default settings for browser, email and blogging)
      2)Custom setup (choose your custom applications for web, search, blogging, email, messaging, help, tags and a variety of other confusing minutae that you really don't want to spend 45 minutes going through.

      They'll make option 2 intimidating and a total PITA that most people will pick option 1 (which, of course, installs ie8.)

  5. Re:Changes nothing by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Good god. The whole thing is ridiculous in the first place, now you're going to measure the fucking icons?

  6. Google Chrome by akcpe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here's something I think is interesting but haven't heard mentioned. Since Google Chrome is a likely candidate for the "browser ballot" I can see a scenario such as this: Most people have no idea what a web browser is to begin with as evidenced by: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ Clearly many people think that "Google" is a browser rather than a search engine. This seems like a great way to exploit that percentage of the population by offering this "browser ballot". Many people will see "Google" and think "Oh! That's what I normally use. I'll choose that" Thoughts?

    1. Re:Google Chrome by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 2, Informative

      Erm.... Just for the record: there is a similar video done in Amsterdam. Of course, you won't understand the replies because they were in Dutch, but I'll tell you the result: it wasn't a damned thing better....

    2. Re:Google Chrome by rennerik · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would suspect that, should Microsoft include Google Chrome in the browser ballot screen, they would only put the icon with the word "Chrome" next to it. The icon is unfamiliar, and gives no indication of Google. Of course, if they do it for Google, they'd have to do it for all the other browsers. So, instead of seeing "Mozilla FireFox", it'd just be "FireFox". I have no idea if that's something that they care about, or consumers for that matter. We'll just have to find out.

  7. Re:Stupid people will still be stupid by Etrias · · Score: 4, Funny

    My odds are that Microsoft will go with a "butterfly ballot" style and convince them to either install IE or Pat Buchanan.

  8. Why not OEMs? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 5, Insightful

    European regulators requested that Redmond bundle multiple browsers on new PCs

    Excuse me? I can understand requesting IE to be unbundled, but telling MS to bundle other browsers is just stupid. Let the OEMs do that. I hope the summary isn't having a rare moment of accuracy.

  9. Re:Stupid people will still be stupid by ifchairscouldtalk · · Score: 5, Funny

    Easy solution: let's rename Firefox. I suggest Porn.

  10. Good idea for Microsoft. by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Someone on another forum brought this up. Microsoft should offer a list of about 100 browsers in the EU version of Windows. Literally 100. Put IE first and then put the rest in random order.

    Then tell the EU to put that in their pipes and smoke on it.

    1. Re:Good idea for Microsoft. by Rockoon · · Score: 2, Informative

      I can write 100 of them tonight... while I am sleeping. Seriously.

      Its dead-simple to not only make a browser based on Microsofts rendering engine using Visual Basic 6, its also simple to make an installer.

      Drop the control on a form, run the package and deployment wizard, and bobs your uncle.

      There is your choice right there.

      "But but but.. thats all the same rendering engine!"

      Really? So one browser from each rendering engine.. eh?

      Internet Explorer, some noname webkit, and Opera? One of each, right?

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
  11. Re:MS just needs to pull out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You do realize that if they pull out of Europe then Europe will have little choice but to move to alternative OSs right?

    The last thing that Microsoft wants to do is push a large market to (possibly free) alternatives.

  12. Utterly stupid by Darkon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Who gets to decide which browsers are included in this "ballot screen"? Based on what criteria?

    If it's simply going to be the top 5 or whatever based on current market share then this is simply cementing the status quo rather than helping competition and innovation, and if any any every browser gets a look in then what's to stop SuperSpywareBrowser2009 from appearing in the choices?

    1. Re:Utterly stupid by rsmith-mac · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually you had it right, it is the top 5 browsers. From the AP

      would see a Web page prompting them to pick from five of the most popular browsers in Europe.

      Microsoft said the list of browsers would be reviewed twice a year based on usage data for the previous six months.

      Why the top 5, and not the top 6 or 4? I'd have to assume it's because there are 5 major browsers: IE, Firefox, Safari, Chrome, and Opera. This fits all of them, and it's likely that either Chrome or Opera is in the #5 slot, so anything less would be at risk of either the 800lb gorilla or the EU's only home-grown browser not making the list.

      Still, you're right, the problem with this solution is that it helps maintain status quo. The browser monopoly has been replaced with what amounts to a browser cartel - no one is going to want to be bumped off of that list. Which is why all of the proposed solutions suck in some way: You enforce status quo with a limited list, you create virtual anarchy with a list of all browsers, and you screw over users with no browser.

      The browser ballot solution is a lousy solution, and I don't want to be around for the can of worms it creates.

    2. Re:Utterly stupid by quentez · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree with that, If I'm developing a browser, can I have it in that list ? Obviously, NO. Firefox has already something like 30-40% market shares... tough, can you still say that IE is in a monopolly position ? Lately, the only places where I've seen IE used as the default browser (and I see a loooot of pcs) was in small / large businesses. Why ? Because firefox have no msi installer nor active directory settings, so it would be a pain in the butt for IT guys to deploy. I'm french, and regarding this issue I'm ashamed by the EU behavior, even the No-Browser option was better than that. Now it's an open door to everything. In 5 year we'll have to choose at the first startup if we want to use WMP/iTunes, Microsoft security essentials/Norton/Bitdefender/McAfee, Windows Explorer/GnomeForWindows/StardockExplorer. And by 2040, will the windows package will also contain Mac OSXX ? By pleading one monopoly, their creating 5 monopolies.

  13. You're a genius. by chrb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously, Microsoft should just pull out of an economy of $18.394 trillion GDP? While in the meantime, the governments involved would most likely invoke the "national security" clauses in copyright treaties to allow piracy of Windows and Office, whilst simultaneously launching accelerated projects to switch to Linux asap? What do you think this would do to the MS stock price? And why should any corporation have the right to violate the laws of democratic nations anyway? Microsoft is not the only corporation to have been fined by the E.U.

  14. Re:MS just needs to pull out. by exasperation · · Score: 2, Insightful

    While a risky move, Microsoft just needs to pull out of the EU and say "Piss off"

    Lolwut? Why yes, Microsoft should pull out of the world's largest market, probably cutting their revenue by about 30%, just to stand up to some pushy EU bureaucrats, that makes good business sense!

  15. Re:MS just needs to pull out. by Kokuyo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Don't underestimate human behaviour. I think it's pretty save to say that if Microsoft gives us Europeans the finger, we're going to be pretty pissed and we'll be looking for the most hurtful alternative we can find just out of spite. Yeah, we're funny that way.

    What has me stumped, though, is this negative attitude toward this idea. Perhaps my memory is just failing me, but I thought this was exactly what Slashdotters were crying out for just weeks ago when they said they would sell 7 without any browser at all (which I found pretty amusing an idea).

  16. Re:Ballot screen? by markdavis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    > "OK, Joe...which engine do you want in your new Chevy? A Chevy, Ford, Toyota, Chrysler, Nissan, or Honda engine?"

    If Chevy had 90% of the market, were declared a damaging, predatory monopoly, and you could load a new engine as easily as a browser...

    sure, why not?

  17. Re:MS just needs to pull out. by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's not like they are keeping other browsers from being installed.

    What you say is true, now; but if you're older than a teenager you'll remember that in the 1990s Microsoft on a couple occasions apparently did sabotage both Netscape Navigator and Apple Quicktime.

    The EU is acting based on Microsoft's history as a convicted monopolist, not based on the company's current behavior.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  18. Re:Stupid people will still be stupid by sakdoctor · · Score: 5, Funny

    Microsoft Porn explorer: Where even looking can get you infected.
    Mozilla PornFox: For furries
    Google Chrome & latex: BSDM
    Opera: It's not porn, it's art.
    Apple Safari: Gay and transsexual.
    SeaMonkey: Watersports
    AOL Explorer: MILFs
    Dillo: Masturbation
    Netscape Porn Navigator: Necrophilia.

  19. Imagine these choices by Kashell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Internet Explorer
    Yeratu
    Swallow
    Tires

    I made these up of course, but to your average user, that's exactly what they'll see when they see:

    Internet Explorer
    Firefox
    Opera
    Chrome

    What browser do you think they will choose? Hmmmm?

    1. Re:Imagine these choices by jonbryce · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But if it is

      Internet Explorer
      Mozilla Firefox
      Opera
      Google Chrome

      A lot of people will go for the fourth option. They have heard of google.

    2. Re:Imagine these choices by Plug · · Score: 4, Funny

      Could we give them an "I'm Feeling Lucky" option?

    3. Re:Imagine these choices by raynet · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ah but Opera will rename their browser to Recommended Option or Select This To Continue.

      --
      - Raynet --> .
  20. Re:Choices by StrawberryFrog · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm quite happy with IE 8. I can easily use it to download firefox.

    --

    My Karma: ran over your Dogma
    StrawberryFrog

  21. Re:Changes nothing by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yeah. They'll need to audit transparency of the icons, attractiveness, icon size, order, spacing between them (wouldn't want to let them offer IE first, then 10 pages lower show Firefox and other choices), the textual description of the browsers' capabilities to ensure IE doesn't sound overly attractive, etc...

    It's like a bureaucrat's wet dream!

  22. My fellow Americans by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Please stop being a bunch of douches, asshats, and twats.

    "Oh, those nasty Euros are only doing this because they don't like successful American companies!"

    Give it a BREAK!!

    Only the most fanatical of the fanbois can deny that Microsoft is a monopoly. And, only half of those can do so with a straight face. The US government was first to say so, the EU made the same finging, and any homo sapient with an IQ larger than the number of digits on his hands has to be able to see that.

    If AT&T could be broken up years ago, there is absolutely no reason that Microsoft can't be broken up as well. Short of being dismantled into several smaller companies, they will abide by court rulings around the world, wherever they do business. That is the nature of being multinational, after all.

    And, no, Microsoft is NOT an American company. No matter what it says on paper, Microsoft has offices and subsidiaries around the world. They are multinational, and they take advantage of every loophole that exists in international taxation, money transfer, etc. Microsoft has all but dictated terms to national governments - "take it or leave it" deals.

    All the whining and excuse making on Microsoft's behalf makes me sick. And, whining that the world is picking on an "American" company is worse than anything. Microsoft needs to be put in their place, once and for all.

    Screw 'em all. If Microsoft were all that successful, they would be making all the money they want, and every little peasant among us would be HAPPY to give them all the money they wanted. They've spent a couple decades alienating people, and making enemies, by one means or another. Let them pay the price, and stop whining.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br