EU and IE saga

[moronoxyd]

so what am I missing here? oh let me guess, EU does not like MS because MS is a U.S. owned corporation and not german, french, english etc...

The EU just fined the energy companies E.On and GDF for 533 Billion Euro each for anti-competetive behaviour.
They've surely done that because those are American companies and not... oh, wait, GDF is short for Gaz de France and E.On is a German company... dang, I thought I finally understood how the world works...


Sorry, but you really need to loose that "everyone is out to hurt America" attitude.
It just so happens that sometimes American companies don't comply with the rules. And when that happens, those actions need to be investigated and fined.

As you might remember, Microsoft was under investigation by the US DOJ and close to be devided for their misdeeds.

Can anyone please explain to me how is having a preinstalled browser a monopoly?

Microsoft has a monopoly in the operation systems market.
And they used the power of that monopoly to push their browser.

It's not forbidden to have a monopoly. But it is not ok to misuse that monopoly.

Apple is the doing the same thing and so is Linux. How come EU is not suing them???

Because neither Apple nor the Linux manufacturers are monopolies or semi-monopolies.

[beGi]

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAct ... EMO/09/272

The European Commission notes with interest Microsoft's announcement of its plans for Windows 7, and in particular of the apparent separation of Internet Explorer (IE) from Windows in the EEA. The Commission will shortly decide in the pending browser tying antitrust case whether or not Microsoft’s conduct from 1996 to date has been abusive and, if so, what remedy would be necessary to create genuine consumer choice and address the anticompetitive effects of Microsoft’s long-standing conduct. In terms of potential remedies if the Commission were to find that Microsoft had committed an abuse, the Commission has suggested that consumers should be offered a choice of browser, not that Windows should be supplied without a browser at all.

Well atleast they figured out that lack of browser is not good...

[moronoxyd]

If you have a closer look at this press release you'll see that it is from June 12th.

So the fact that Microsofts is going to release Windows 7 in Europe without IE is not mandated (?) by the EU but their very own descision.

[tylerwylie]

I don't see why people are complaining about IE, IE's extremely adept at getting me to www.opera.com and then never being used again. Then again, I use Windows for all about 10 minutes a week at work when I have to open a Visio network diagram. Ah linux ftw

[TTY]

Microsoft offers EU 'browser ballot' compromise

[moronoxyd]

Finally somebody at Microsoft had the idea to actually TALK with EU representatives to find a solution that both parties can live with.

[RealBlackStuff]

This would finally force website developers, to make their sites compliant to ALL (or at least a lot more) browsers.
DOWN with only IE (lack of) compliance!

[moronoxyd]

Ars Technica has some more on this topic: EU Vista, XP users will also get to vote IE off the island

[tylerwylie]

This would finally force website developers, to make their sites compliant to ALL (or at least a lot more) browsers.
DOWN with only IE (lack of) compliance!

Yes, because force is the way? Please...

[beGi]

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/ ... pcoming_OS

So nothing "new"...

Good...

[Puppy]

EU reminds me the old communism time, nothing else. Why a company should advertise a crappy competitive product like Opera ? Do I have to read "You might want to buy Eizo" on my NEC monitor screen when I turn it on first time ? That's silly.

NEC is the only company manufacturing IPS panels with A-TW filter and X-Light(r) backlight technology. Hey, that's MONOPOLY ! Do you see the idiocy ?

[Puppy]

Because neither Apple nor the Linux manufacturers are monopolies or semi-monopolies.

Wrong. Monopoly is that you are NOT allowed to buy some kind of product or service from different company. That's not the case. There are just unsuccessful whinning companies having crappy products noone wants to use. I don't want to support them. I have chosen the best one - Microsoft. Period.

[killer]

Puppy,

I am interested in your comments.

You are in the Czech Republic which suffered from Russian communism. I doubt there was much choice in those days. Perhaps I am wrong?

I believe in competition and I think the EU wants that to be available. In your opinion, has the EU prevented competition or enabled it?

However, a lot of people do use these products and I can see their point of view. How fair is it to call them "crappy products" and "noone wants to use them" when those statements are neither free of opinion, nor true, in terms of market share?

BTW, I have tried Opera and Firefox and have returned to IE because it suits me better.

All the best.

[moronoxyd]

EU reminds me the old communism time, nothing else.

Oh, so the US is a communist country, too?
They where close to splitting Microsoft in two separate companies due to anti-competitive behaviour...

Because neither Apple nor the Linux manufacturers are monopolies or semi-monopolies.

Wrong. Monopoly is that you are NOT allowed to buy some kind of product or service from different company.

Get your facts straight, man:

In economics, a monopoly (from Greek monos , alone or single + polein , to sell) exists when a specific individual or an enterprise has sufficient control over a particular product or service to determine significantly the terms on which other individuals shall have access to it.
Monopolies are thus characterized by a lack of economic competition for the good or service that they provide and a lack of viable substitute goods.

Microsoft obviously dominates the desktop OS market. That makes it at least a semi-monopoly.

Apple has a share of a few percent, Linux of about 1%.
So neither of them is a monopoly.
So my statment is correct and your "wrong" is unfounded.

That's not the case. There are just unsuccessful whinning companies having crappy products noone wants to use. I don't want to support them. I have chosen the best one - Microsoft. Period.

You may choose what you want, nobody is denying your that right.

But there are people who are using Apple products (do'h!), Linux, Firefox, Opera et. al.
Not the majority of people, but more then just a few fanatics.
In Europe, Firefox is a strong rival for IE with a market share of above 30%.
So these products can not be that crappy.

[Puppy]

You are in the Czech Republic which suffered from Russian communism. I doubt there was much choice in those days. Perhaps I am wrong?

There was no choice. And the EU is slowly getting to the same point.

I believe in competition and I think the EU wants that to be available. In your opinion, has the EU prevented competition or enabled it?

EU wants to get control over everything. Introducing more and more taxes, directions and bureaucracy. EU penalizes successful companies for nonsenses (Windows without Media Player - who cares ? and so on) getting money from them to be stronger. It is extremly dangerous organization behaving the same way what we already know from the past. You can not resist as Ireland has proven.

Today it is Microsoft ... next time it might be your company.

[Puppy]

Microsoft obviously dominates the desktop OS market. That makes it at least a semi-monopoly.

So does Cisco in network market. And many others in other areas.

You may choose what you want, nobody is denying your that right

Yes. So why the EU dictates Microsoft to advertise competitive products and, that's what really bothers me, even wants to include them on the Windows installation media ? This is unacceptable. The installation media is supposed to be the only reliable source of clean virus/malware free content. Big companies like Microsoft have mechanisms for reliable builds. But since there is dictated content which does not comply these rules (sorry, I don't believe Opera company at all) the media content is no longer safe from my point of view.

[killer]

1. There was no choice. And the EU is slowly getting to the same point.

2. Today it is Microsoft ... next time it might be your company.

1. Well, in this corner of the EU there is a plethora of choice for anything you care to name. We are, and always have been, an enterprise culture.

2. It will never be my company. Small enterprises are encouraged.

Please offer facts (and quote factual sources) rather than offering opinions.

[moronoxyd]

Microsoft obviously dominates the desktop OS market. That makes it at least a semi-monopoly.

So does Cisco in network market. And many others in other areas.

So what's your point?

I *guess* that you wonder why Microsoft got into trouble and Cisco did not.
Well, the answer would be: It is not forbidden to become or be a monopoly. Only when you use your power in one field (here: operating systems) to unfairly push other products (here: media player, browser) your actions will be analyzed and possibly be considered anti-competitive.

And as I said before: Many countries have laws against anti-competitive behaviour, including the USA.
And do you really suggest that the USA is a communist country?

You may choose what you want, nobody is denying your that right

Yes. So why the EU dictates Microsoft to advertise competitive products and, that's what really bothers me, even wants to include them on the Windows installation media ?

First: Do you have ANY PROPER source for your claim that the EU wants Microsoft to include other browsers on the installation media? Any at all?
'Cause this is the first I heard about this, and until you bring any prove I will consider this fud .


Then: We don't have a free market in Europe. Neither in the EU as a whole nor in the separate countries.
There are always limits to what companies are allowed to do.
Microsoft knew the rules when they entered the European market, and by entering they agreed to stick to them.
If the EU commission comes to the conclusion that Microsoft didn't, and if Microsoft's likely appeal to the proper EU court doesn't overthrow that descision, then they broke the law and have to suffer.

We're not (yet) living in a world controlled by companies.

This is unacceptable. The installation media is supposed to be the only reliable source of clean virus/malware free content. Big companies like Microsoft have mechanisms for reliable builds. But since there is dictated content which does not comply these rules (sorry, I don't believe Opera company at all) the media content is no longer safe from my point of view.

Yeah, like Microsoft products are all safe and secure and thus don't need any patches or hotfixes or... oh, wait...

[Puppy]

Well, the answer would be: It is not forbidden to become or be a monopoly. Only when you use your power in one field (here: operating systems) to unfairly push other products (here: media player, browser) your actions will be analyzed and possibly be considered anti-competitive.

Other operating system vendors do the same (Apple includes QuickTime player). Microsoft does not prevent you to install any other web browser or media player (remember the Apple 'kill switch' story ?). It is just silly whinning of vendors whose products are non-competitive.

And as I said before: Many countries have laws against anti-competitive behaviour, including the USA. And do you really suggest that the USA is a communist country?

USA had never taken such ridiculous action focused on "getting money from a rich one" EU did. The way EU behaves (more control, taxes, directions, commands, so-called protection etc.) is slowly getting to a dictature having things in common with old COMECON. The worst things always starts with couple of minor "innocent" ones. But you have to watch it very carefully. My opinions are based on experience. Fortunately there are organisations like Libertas trying to prevent the disaster.

Today consumer electronics vendors have to release special editions of their products (cameras, professional monitors etc.) exclusively for EU because of some regulations, usually with limited features. So you have two versions of the same product for EU countries and the rest of (free) world -> unnecessary higher price. And this is only beginning ...

[Puppy]

Yeah, like Microsoft products are all safe and secure and thus don't need any patches or hotfixes or... oh, wait...

No software is without bugs. I'm talking about safety of distributing the binary files from the vendor to the customer.

[craigmontHunter]

In my opinion, if a person wants to use something other than IE, they probably know where to find it. The problem is that if they include a popup box when you first try to connect to the internet, then if you do not have a connection, only an internat, you are using either an old version, or if it downloads the browser, they cannot get it. People who do not care what they use will use what they are given, and what they are used to-My parents used IE since windows 95 (v3 was included with our disk) and they continue to use it today. It works, that is all they care about. Untill we had problems with OE not being to send from multiple accounts via drop down box, my mom used OE, now she has switched to thunderbird.

If I am wrong about anything, please correct me.

[moronoxyd]

Well, the answer would be: It is not forbidden to become or be a monopoly. Only when you use your power in one field (here: operating systems) to unfairly push other products (here: media player, browser) your actions will be analyzed and possibly be considered anti-competitive.

Other operating system vendors do the same (Apple includes QuickTime player). Microsoft does not prevent you to install any other web browser or media player (remember the Apple 'kill switch' story ?). It is just silly whinning of vendors whose products are non-competitive.

You really have problems unterstanding the difference between "a monopoly does something" and "a company that has no monopoly does the same", right?

Nobody cares if some (rather) small company tries to make its customers use another of their products.
But if a monopoly uses all it's force to push a product, that hurts the competition, because they do not have that force in the other field.

You can call it whining all you want, but the fact that all major market oriented economies for more than a hundred years have laws against anti-competetive behaviour, no matter whether they're more free market oriented like the USA or leaning more towards a social market like the EU, is telling.
Hundreds of people who know more about economies then you and I do support that system.
There's probably a reason.

And as I said before: Many countries have laws against anti-competitive behaviour, including the USA. And do you really suggest that the USA is a communist country?

USA had never taken such ridiculous action focused on "getting money from a rich one" EU did.

I really hate to repeat myself: The USA was close to splitting Microsoft up into two separate corporations. That's way beyond what the EU does.

Today consumer electronics vendors have to release special editions of their products (cameras, professional monitors etc.) exclusively for EU because of some regulations, usually with limited features. So you have two versions of the same product for EU countries and the rest of (free) world -> unnecessary higher price. And this is only beginning ...

There are lots of reasons why there are separate products for different markets.
This has sometimes to do with regulations, yes, but that's nothing that only happens in the EU.

In Japan there was (or is) a law in effect that basically forced music publishers to create special versions of music CDs, because they had to make the releases different from those released elsewhere.
Last time I checked Japan was not a member of the EU.

Due to the fact that the USA considered strong encryption a "weapon", products using such encryption hat do be produced in a different version for non-US markets that did not contain such strong encryptinion.
I kid you not.
I still have installation media for IE5.5 with a separate patch from Microsoft (released later) to add 128-bit encryption.


So please stop your whining about the bad, bad EU.
They are not better or worse than many other western countries/organisations.

Yeah, like Microsoft products are all safe and secure and thus don't need any patches or hotfixes or... oh, wait...

No software is without bugs. I'm talking about safety of distributing the binary files from the vendor to the customer.

I call [censored].
Hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people use Firefox, Opera et. al.
Their "build mechanisms" aren't any worse than that of Microsoft.
Just because a company is bigger doesn't mean it's better.
Microsoft is everything BUT a powerhouse of safety and reliability.


And once again: Where's your prove? Where's your sources?
I've yet to see where you got that idea that the EU wants Microsoft to include alternative browsers on the installation media.
So far I only see the mad ramblings of somebody who seems to be on a crusade against the EU.

[Puppy]

But if a monopoly uses all it's force to push a product, that hurts the competition, because they do not have that force in the other field.

The idea that Opera would gain more customers if there wasn't IE included is wrong.

I really hate to repeat myself: The USA was close to splitting Microsoft up into two separate corporations. That's way beyond what the EU does.

Microsoft is located in the USA. That's completely different story.

There are lots of reasons why there are separate products for different markets. This has sometimes to do with regulations, yes, but that's nothing that only happens in the EU.

Let me put it this way. I have lived in three different systems. The communist one, non-EU one and now the EU one. I can not see any advantage of being the member of EU. Everything became even worse since that. Why should I applause EU decision to cripple non-EU made product because they have smelt an easy money there ? Should I buy a car without a wheels next time ? If there was a poll among EU citizens, how many would be happy by such decision ?

There is true monopol energy company over here which increases prices by 10% every year without a reason. What the EU did for us ? Nothing, of course ! It is easier to show the power on nonsenses like Windows without media player than solve real problems. How do EU bureaucrats works ? Watch this http://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/161331/ ... llers.html

So please stop your whining about the bad, bad EU. They are not better or worse than many other western countries/organisations.

Can not agree at all. EU is very dangerous organisation. EU is getting scared of voting about their future because they know most of the people would vote against it. That's why the referendum has been banned in most countries or forced to repeat it until it delivers the 'right' result. All known -isms starts like that.

I've yet to see where you got that idea that the EU wants Microsoft to include alternative browsers on the installation media.

Opera CEO: Windows 7 MUST be fairer http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/ ... rer-589826
"The best solution would be to include multiple browsers, although I'm thinking choosing a browser will not be that big of a deal."

[qviri]

.

[ajkula66]

Puppy wrote

USA had never taken such ridiculous action focused on "getting money from a rich one" EU did.

Watch that change, and fast, under this administration. USA has done ridiculous and counter-productive things like killing the Bell System, though. I'd rather have a monopoly that works than a semi-monopoly that doesn't.

Let me put it this way. I have lived in three different systems. The communist one, non-EU one and now the EU one. I can not see any advantage of being the member of EU. Everything became even worse since that. Why should I applause EU decision to cripple non-EU made product because they have smelt an easy money there ?

Quoted for truth. And then some.

My experiences from different countries and eras pretty much mirror your own...

[tomh009]

USA has done ridiculous and counter-productive things like killing the Bell System, though. I'd rather have a monopoly that works than a semi-monopoly that doesn't.

Alas, FTC and DOJ don't see it that way, and they have done (and tried to do) some crazy things in the past, certainly on par with the EU fines. In some ways the fines aren't even as bad as the forced breakup of AT&T, or the threatened breakup of Microsoft or IBM.

[ajkula66]

qviri wrote:

The idea that Europeans don't support the EU is wrong.

Even if you are correct when it comes to percentage of people (not) supporting the EU, which is not something I'm about to debate since I have no trustworthy data to base my opinion on, consider the following:

a) In 1933, the majority of Germans supported Hitler.

b) In 1990, the majority of Serbs supported Milošević.

And both of these majorities (along with the minorities that didn't support the dictators) got a nice swift kick in the [censored] a few years later.

One of the colossal flaws of any modern democracy is that decisions can be voted on by a severely misguided/uninformed/etc. majority, but when the final bill arrives, everyone gets to pay...

Personally, I never liked the idea of EU, and would be amongst those fighting joining it if I still lived in my birth country...but that's me.

[moronoxyd]

The idea that Opera would gain more customers if there wasn't IE included is wrong.

Would IE have the market share it has if it did not came bundled with Windows?
We will never know, because Microsoft used it's power on the OS market to push IE.

I really hate to repeat myself: The USA was close to splitting Microsoft up into two separate corporations. That's way beyond what the EU does.

Microsoft is located in the USA. That's completely different story.

No, it's not.
It doesn't matter where a company is from.
As soon as it does business in a market it's bound to play by the rules of this market.
Microsoft does business in the EU, so it has to play by the rules of the EU.

I have lived in three different systems. The communist one, non-EU one and now the EU one. I can not see any advantage of being the member of EU. Everything became even worse since that.

That's your opinion and you're entitled to have it.

There is true monopol energy company over here which increases prices by 10% every year without a reason. What the EU did for us ?

Well, I don't know about your energy company, but I know that the EU just recently acted against a French and a German energy company that were engaged in anti-competetive behaviour (as already mentioned in this thread).

I've yet to see where you got that idea that the EU wants Microsoft to include alternative browsers on the installation media.

Opera CEO: Windows 7 MUST be fairer http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/ ... rer-589826
"The best solution would be to include multiple browsers, although I'm thinking choosing a browser will not be that big of a deal."

Since when is the CEO of Opera a representative of the EU?
Sorry, but you've only proven that your argumentation is flawed.

[Puppy]

We will never know, because Microsoft used it's power on the OS market to push IE.

A web browser is natural part of any GUI operating systems these days. If there is a better one, users use/buy it anyway (and they do ... but not the Opera for obvious reasons ). To be fair would mean to ban every browser included in any operating system available in the EU. What application/feature would be the next one ? The calculator, notepad, command-line prompt, CreateProcess API function in kernel ... ?

Since when is the CEO of Opera a representative of the EU?

Since the EU parrots mostly everything they want because it brings them the money. The money to get more power to control. History is repeating but some people still don't want to see it.

[moronoxyd]

We will never know, because Microsoft used it's power on the OS market to push IE.

A web browser is natural part of any GUI operating systems these days.

Microsoft started pushing IE with Windows in the mid-90's. Back then Webbrowsers were definitely NOT a natural part of any GUI os.

If there is a better one, users use/buy it anyway (and they do ... but not the Opera for obvious reasons ).

You're right, people don't buy Opera. Because it's free.
But people use Opera, no matter how often you say otherwise.

To be fair would mean to ban every browser included in any operating system available in the EU.

...or give each browser equal opportunity. Just as it will be,m now that Microsoft stopped Windows 7 E.

Since when is the CEO of Opera a representative of the EU?

Since the EU parrots mostly everything they want because it brings them the money. The money to get more power to control. History is repeating but some people still don't want to see it.

You repeat that over and over, but it still does sound like mad ramblings.


EOT for me.