ie8 fix

European regulators, Opera weigh in on Microsoft's Windows 7 E plan

By | June 12, 2009, 5:11am PDT

At the end of the day Microsoft acknowledged its plan to ship a browser-less version of Windows 7 in the European Union to attempt to appease antitrust regulators, those same regulators and Opera Software weighed in on Redmond’s plan.

Neither the European regulators nor Opera, the company which originally filed the antitrust case over browser-bundling against Microsoft in 2007, is completely keen on Microsoft’s proposed self-inflicted remedy. But the European Commission (EC) did like the bulk of Microsoft’s solution.

A quick recap for those who missed the most recent fireworks in the Microsoft-Opera case: On June 11, Microsoft execs said they are planning to ship in Europe a version of Windows, designated Windows 7 E, that would not include Internet Explorer (IE) 8 as a bundled component. If PC makers want to preload a browser on new Windows 7 machines there, they will need to strike separate licensing deals with Microsoft and/or other browser makers. And customers who buy the product at retail will have to get their browser via FTTP, CD or some other means in order to get onto the Internet.

EC regulators said in a statement that they found a lot to like in Microsoft’s plan to strip IE out of Windows 7 and subsequently allow PC makers to add back in Microsoft’s or a variety of third-party browsers. But they were unhappy with the way Microsoft was removing choice for customers who bought Windows 7 at retail, by providing them with no browser at all. The EC regulators added that they had not been considering requiring MIcrosoft to remove IE from Windows 7 as one of the potential remedies in the case.

(The full EC memo on Microsoft’s Windows 7 E proposal is here.)

Opera officials, for their part, said Microsoft’s proposal didn’t address the heart of the company’s complaint. Opera Chief Technology Officer Håkon Wium Lie provided this statement on June 11:

“We note with intereste that Microsoft now seems capable of separating IE from Windows. However, we do not believe that Microsoft’s move will restore competition for desktop browsers. Most users get their operating systems from the OEM channel and Microsoft will recommend that OEMs pre-install IE8. As such, users are unlikely to be given a genuine choice of browsers.

“We believe that the idea of a ‘ballot screen’ is better: when going online, users will be asked which browser(s) they prefer to use. The browser(s) of choice will the painlessly be installed and ready for use.”

The ballot-screen remedy, one of the options the EC has been mulling, is one possible remedy Microsoft is hoping to avoid, as company officials noted in an official statement yesterday.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Mary Jo has covered the tech industry for more than 25 years for a variety of publications and Web sites, and is a frequent guest on radio, TV and podcasts, speaking about all things Microsoft-related. She is the author of Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft plans to stay relevant in the post-Gates era (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).

Disclosure

Mary-Jo Foley

Freelance journalist/blogger Mary Jo Foley has nothing to disclose. WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get). I do not own Microsoft stock or stock in any of its partners or competitors. I have no business ventures that are sponsored by/funded by Microsoft or any of its partners or competitors.

Biography

Mary-Jo Foley

Mary Jo Foley has covered the tech industry for 25 years for a variety of publications, including ZDNet, eWeek and Baseline. She has kept close tabs on Microsoft strategy, products and technologies for the past 10 years. In the late 1990s, she penned the award-winning "At The Evil Empire" column for ZDNet, and more recently the Microsoft Watch blog for Ziff Davis.

Got a tip? Send her an email with your rants, rumors, tips and tattles. Confidentiality guaranteed.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
210
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: European regulators, Opera weigh in on Microsoft's Windows 7 E plan
dfwekrdfe3701-24353674902965393353664642483588 11th Nov
bcmutt,good post!
0 Votes
+ -
Guess they're showing their true colors now. It's not about fair competition, it's about Opera getting free distribution.

Here MS has completely surrendered and Opera (and the EU) is still complaining. Go figure. happy
0 Votes
+ -
I was waiting for this
djmik 12th Jun 2009
Real motive revealed. No free luch Opera. Time to compete like the rest of the big boys.
0 Votes
+ -
Possibly it is time for IE to compete
nilotpal_c Updated - 12th Jun 2009
on an equal footing with the other browser vendors instead of getting a free ride.
Let us wait for the verdict.
And why do IE fanboi's get so afraid of the drop down menu? Is it because IE is hopeless in front of the other browsers? I would have thought that a company really confident of its superiority would have welcomed the drop down menu, or does Microsoft know deep down that IE is hopeless?
0 Votes
+ -
You haven't been paying attention.
mikefarinha 12th Jun 2009
If you have been paying attention Microsoft has been making IE more and more compatible with open standards. I use Firefox exclusively, as do many other people. The day's of IE lock-in are now over.

You can finally brush that chip off your shoulder.

Microsoft has come to terms that the money is no longer in holding the largest share of browser installations, rather it is in the platform/runtime that can run in any browser.

Silverlight.
0 Votes
+ -
No chip on shoulder here
nilotpal_c 12th Jun 2009
I know about Microsoft increasingly supporting open standards here. I was just responding to a fanboy like statement. If market share reflected quality, IE would have been dead and buried by now.
0 Votes
+ -
it's not fanboism...
Fark 12th Jun 2009
It feels highly Unamerican (as this decision comes from the EU, it is) to force a company to hock it's competitors wares. This might be normal in the EU, but here?

If MS wants to play in Europe, they should realize Europe in not America.
0 Votes
+ -
I always thought that
nilotpal_c 12th Jun 2009
If MS or any other company want to ply their trade in a region, they have to follow the rules of that region.
Furthermore, wait for the verdict, and do not equate Microsoft with the US. This is a commercial fight, not a nationalistic one. It is very easy to call it an Europe vs US fight, but remember, even though the complaint was lodged by Opera, all other companies which have supported Opera have been American companies(Mozilla, Google).
Sometimes, seeing the responses, I feel that Microsoft marketing is at overdrive trying to portray this as a Europe vs America fight to garner support rather than the commercial fight it really is.
0 Votes
+ -
EU = Command Economy
Too Old For IT 12th Jun 2009
The EU is trying to ram their jingoistic vision of a socialist workers paradise (communism) down the throat of EU consumers.

In this vision of paradise, only European companies succeed, while evil American companies always fail.

I get it, really I do ...
0 Votes
+ -
I really wish...
SimonUK2 Updated - 13th Jun 2009
...that you people would leave your typical extremist views out of this. It has nothing to do with politics in the terms that you are trying to suggest. Communism? You don't have a clue do you? Just because the GOP suggest that those untrustworthy Europeans are all red bastartds don't make it so. You do realise that your whole political system is based on the Franco-socialist system, before the term 'socialism' was coined? But hey, let's not let history and the truth cloud your jingoistic views. Lets ignore the fact that Microsoft habitually lie and are convicted monopolists. Lets ignore the fact that the majority party in the European Parliament is a Right-wing Christian democrat party. No, let your jingoism and protectionist conspiracy theories rule the day...
0 Votes
+ -
Oh, wouldst that it were true...
ReadWryt (error) 15th Jun 2009
I fear this is much less commercial than political. It's just more of the EU's unstated policy that "success in great abundance must be scrutinized and squelched for the common good".
0 Votes
+ -
um...
Badgered 12th Jun 2009
Possibly it is time for IE to compete

Isn't that what MS is doing with Windows 7 E? With no browser installed, MS, Opera, Mozilla, and everyone else has to compete. It's exactly what you're asking for.

And why do IE fanboi's get so afraid of the drop down menu?

I assume you mean the "ballot" system for choosing a browser. As has been said before, why should MS be required to promote other's browsers? Would you require a Chevy dealer to promote Fords in their showrooms? That's insane.

Oh and before you go off about what a "fanboi" I am... this was typed in FF.
0 Votes
+ -
Then I am all for it. However, I strongly suspect this will just be another wink nod response. MS to OEMs: You can preinstall IE you know, and "wink"you will get a special discount on Windows for that
OEM: Nods
Actually there is no non controversial solution to this problem. Money power will win in the end. And the money presently is in MS's pockets.
0 Votes
+ -
Actually, choice never left...
ReadWryt (error) 15th Jun 2009
everybody is free to choose NEVER to click on the Big Blue "E". I don't know what all this handwringing is about, or why they aren't going after Apple/Safari the same way...
0 Votes
+ -
Wrong
Wintel BSOD 15th Jun 2009
If you have to go to a site that requires ActiveX, you have to use IE.

Now you can say "don't go to those websites" but if I have a requirement that requires me to go to those sites where no alternatives exist, then I have no choice. It then becomes a specious argument on your part.

When it comes to Microshaft, you can never say never.
0 Votes
+ -
Why are you so against choice?
Wintel BSOD 15th Jun 2009
What's wrong with the ballot option? The OEMs already put crapware on there against M$'s own wishes, so additional things that give people a real choice, they shouldn't have any problem with.

Besides, I'd still have to have two browsers anyway. FF for general stuff and IE to access corporately owned, ActiveX infected sites like M$'s own websites, Secunia, etc...
0 Votes
+ -
There has always been choice
medezark@... 15th Jun 2009
The entire EU argument is specious.
0 Votes
+ -
Then stop bundling
Wintel BSOD 15th Jun 2009
Then they'll have no argument...
0 Votes
+ -
@ anythingbutvista: Gee...
Wolfie2K3 15th Jun 2009
Then they'll have no argument...

I DO believe that's the whole point of Windows E... Isn't it?
0 Votes
+ -
@Wolfie2K3
Wintel BSOD 15th Jun 2009
They wouldn't have done it voluntarily without sanctions.

That's the way corporate monopolies operate. With the legal system holding a gun to their head.
0 Votes
+ -
Stop bundling
rtk 15th Jun 2009
that's exactly what MS is suggesting, you're flip flopping between un-bundle and bundle-all (ballot).
0 Votes
+ -
Either one is an alternative...
Wintel BSOD 15th Jun 2009
...to the situation that exists now.

No flip flop. I can go either way.
0 Votes
+ -
I Love Choice...
windozefreak 15th Jun 2009
I say, let mozilla put the ballot on the opening screen on their flop of a browser. Choice Is Good!!!
0 Votes
+ -
No, it's past time for the IE-wannabes to compete
mechBgon Updated - 14th Jun 2009
Internet Explorer can be pre-configured, centrally deployed, centrally managed and enforced, centrally audited, and centrally updated. The required tools (IEAK, GPOs, MBSA and WSUS) don't cost extra, assuming you've got an AD domain. These central-management capabilities have existed in IE for about ten years now, and are worth their weight in gold.

The supposed "competition" still has no enterprise-management features to offer. I don't see why it's so difficult... just look at enterprise security software for an example. It too can be centrally deployed, configured, enforced, tasked, etc. It's time for the alternate-browser makers to get a clue: we don't want to go manually deal with every desktop system in a fleet of hundreds, just to deal with your home/SOHO-level browser, any more than we'd want to go manually install and configure hundreds of instances of a home/SOHO antivirus product.

Microsoft also guarantees a support lifecycle. Taking IE5.01 for example, it shipped with Win2000. When it's all said and done, Microsoft will have supported it for over ten years. How many other browser makers are ready to guarantee support for the entire life of the OS that their product is bundled with?

I find it sad that the alleged "competition" is trying to force their way into a bundling arrangement, when they have no central-management capabilities to offer, and are not likely to hold up their end of the deal with ~10 years of guaranteed support for the version that gets bundled. If this is the cure, it's worse than the disease.
0 Votes
+ -
Who gets on the ballot?
gbsills 15th Jun 2009
The real problem with the ballot method is choosing who gets to be on the ballot in the first place. Should it be any decent browser created by anyone in the world? Just browser sthat have some market share (Firefox and IE). What happens when a new browser like Chrome comes on the scene? Who pays for the glorified installer? A consortium of browser developers? If the installer is open to all browser developers then who pays the cost of the security analsysis to make sure that folks are installing bot hosts? Lot of questions. Better to just let folks download the browser they like.

0 Votes
+ -
A free ride...?
Wolfie2K3 15th Jun 2009
Er.. Right - like Safari gets with OSX...? Or Firefox gets with many, if not all Linux distros...?
0 Votes
+ -
Not the same
Wintel BSOD 15th Jun 2009
Firefox on Linux can be easily uninstalled through the distro's Package Repository.

Unlike IE which is embedded and can't be removed. Have they really changed their tune on this? We'll wait and see...
0 Votes
+ -
They are mad...
ShadowGIATL 12th Jun 2009
because they couldn't get people to pay $50 for their browser, and now they want MS to replace their browser with Opera. I guess they thought the EU would help them do it, but unless there is money involved, the EU isn't that concerned.
0 Votes
+ -
You are missing the point
prof123 13th Jun 2009
This whole business about competing browsers and
other software is about equal access. There are 2 ways
to install software: it's pre-installed on your hard drive
OR download and install it yourself. It is that simple.
Obviously, pre-installed software has a big advantage
because most users are not computer savvy and they
will use whatever was pre-installed by default.

The EU solution is not such a bad idea. Have several
browsers pre-installed on the hard drive and let the
user at installation time choose which is the default
browser. As long as they can later switch their choice
just as easily, this is a fair way to do it.

MS has a monopoly on the OS and also a monopoly on
pre-installed software. All pre-installed software
should include competing vendors so the playing field
is even. This is the whole deal, it is that simple.
0 Votes
+ -
Pay like everyone else does
Stan57 13th Jun 2009
What a load of crap,there is equal access now. There nothing stopping anyone from downloading any browser they want. Whats really going oh here and opra proved it,is that they want a free ride on Windows. Make them pay just like any other app thats preloaded with windows.
0 Votes
+ -
sorry buy a clue
Aussie_Troll 14th Jun 2009
then go and find out what a monopoly is, otherwise you just sould like an idiot.

and im sure your not an idiot,, ?? are you.

as for ms, they should unbunle the entire OS from the EU, screw em, let em eat cake.

turn of the tap of the MS money cashcow, the EU so love to leach off.

But hey they found out INTEL has a fair bit of cash too, so expect more extortions from them as well.

but when you get a clue, and wake up and smell the roses. you will see how silly your "monopoly" comment IS.
0 Votes
+ -
How about THIS point, prof123...
justanitguy 15th Jun 2009
Every piece of software you install has it's own vulnerabilities. You are talking about increasing the number of vulnerabilities by an order of magnitude by preinstalling programs that are not needed. What you are proposing is to install IE, Firefox, Opera, Safari (the most vulnerable browser of all); and how many others? Are you going to include Bob's Browser? Ingrid's Internet? Every browser anywhere that has more than 0.001% usage? The nightmare for admin's, and the potential holes for hackers, are unbelievable.
0 Votes
+ -
EU plan is justified
prof123 15th Jun 2009
OK, take your average user. They buy a PC, turn it on
and there is an icon on the desktop for the internet.
So, they think, ok, this is how I go to the internet. And
this is how they access the internet from now on.

If you removed that icon, they would get all confused
and most of them couldn't find their browser (most of
them don't even know what a browser is). You see,
from their point of view it's just another window. I
would say a majority of users think of a computer like
that, a giant black box with icons and shortcuts on the
desktop that someone set up for them.

It is a minority of users who know about browsers,
how to download, install and so on. The vast majority
do not have these skills. They use whatever is there.

Now you can appreciate what an advantage it is for IE
to have that icon on the desktop. Pre-installed
software is a huge advantage and that is where MS has
a monopoly which has to be broken.
0 Votes
+ -
I'm Sorry But...
windozefreak 15th Jun 2009
...You make it sounds like some people should not be using a computer, let alone a browser. Please tell me this is not what you intended???
0 Votes
+ -
Not at all
prof123 16th Jun 2009
Most users use whatever is installed. So MS has a big
advantage if their browser is pre-installed. Firefox has
no such advantage, there is unequal access. If say top 4
browsers were pre-installed, that would make more
sense and users could choose.
0 Votes
+ -
So your point would be that...
ReadWryt (error) 15th Jun 2009
...Microsoft should have to remove it's Defragmenter, Media Player, Text Editor, Terminal Emulator, Games and the like because there are companies which produce their own versions of these things and charge for them? Perhaps the other answers would be that no Auto Manufacturer can sell vehicles which have a Radio in them, no tires standard on cars...oh no, Toyota would be creating a monopoly for someone because people are not technically saavy enough to change tires.

I remember the whole Netscape thing. I remember them screaming that after they had given Navigator away until they grabbed 70%+ market share and then started charging for it, Microsoft came along like the eeeeevil goons they are and started *gasp* giving away their browser. I remember Netscape making all manner of claims, some legit...some questionable, about the actions Microsoft was taking, and the whole time it all ended up with with poor pitiful beaten down Netscape selling to AOL for $4.2 Billion dollars. Sounds like they didn't do THAT badly in the face of such horribly unfair competition.

Now we have this assumption that people are smart enough to download and install games, but not smart enough to download and install a browser? *eyeroll*
0 Votes
+ -
Remember that?

Remember IE4 released in 1997?

That wasn't that long ago. People seemed to be able to get around before then.

What will they do now... LOL... grin
0 Votes
+ -
Exactly!
medezark@... 15th Jun 2009
You have successfully demolished all of your own arguments supporting microsoft's bundling of competitor's browsers with Windows.

Congratulations
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
so next, are we going to require toyotas to be
unclefixer@... Updated - 15th Jun 2009
built with a choice of toyota, ford, or chevy motors? Even non-savvy computer users have a friend, relative, acquaintence, co-worker, etc. who will recommend and help them with another browser- usually the same ones who help them with antivirus software. The other non-savvy users are folks who just don't spend enough time on the computer to even give two squirts about the browser.
By the way, please hold the fanboi comments- this is being typed on Camino browser on a G4 PowerMac running OS X so the IE thing doesn't even bother me. I just think it's bogus that this has even gotten as far as it has.
0 Votes
+ -
I'm not sure it is about free distribution
TheTruthisOutThere@... 12th Jun 2009
From the way Lie phrased it, I think the idea is that after selecting a browser on the ballot screen, it is then downloaded and installed.

This would make some sense, because it would not burden Microsoft with to continually update the distribution images with new versions of browsers.

I assume IE would not need to be downloaded (the EC said they werent contemplating this).

All the ballot screen really seems to do is say "do you know you have a choice of browser".
Of course this is about free distribution! Of course it is! If you do not know, you should know,that putting a selectable link to a download on a PC desktop as opposed to the actual executable file itself is still active distribution. Clicking on the link to download then install makes no difference to the software producer in most cases. It still provides a direct product placement right there in front of the face of the PC user.

This whole thing is such nonsense. I can understand not including media player, messengers and other such peripheral software, but a web browser? You might as well force MS not to include the desktop trashcan due to the fact that it leads to MS monopolizing the desktop trashcan market. In this day and age, and for many years past now a web browser is an integral part of the computer using experience in almost every case, and it should hardly have been a wonder MS supplied a design of their own as part of the OS package.

If MS now has to provide for distribution for competitors software its really gone over the line. Every small time software company worth its salt should now be working overtime to create a web browser of their own and do whatever it takes to get it included as an optional browser on the Windows desktop! Imagine, how can you get better product placement for your software then to have it parked on the desktop of every new Windows 7 OS!

Its such a priceless position to be in any effort would be worth it. Without a question it had to be the kind of result Opera envisioned as the home run result of their court efforts.

Of course its about distribution.
0 Votes
+ -
Nothing is free
Stan57 13th Jun 2009
Its not free to write code for windows. programmers are payed at MS,so including just the code is a cost to MS.
0 Votes
+ -
Wait a second here
Quebec-french 12th Jun 2009
Completely surrendered not really. More like
you force me to do something i dont wwant ..ok
here the deal no broswer what so ever. User
will have to find a browser on there own ....
(not very intelligent )

Its a good step in the way but no once again
MS try too weasel it way .....there is only one
solution and it complete compliance period .


you make IE 7or 8 removable as a default,
bundle all known FREE,
browser,Firefox,safari,chrome .
as far as Opera (stick it where the sun dont
shine no free ride for paying browser).

That is a solution free browser for all and the
customer choose. no one get more advantage that
they other.



0 Votes
+ -
Cannot have it both ways
GuidingLight 12th Jun 2009
you cannot say that Microsoft is not allowed to bundle in software because it is an operating system, then say that "Well, a web browser is part of the operating system, and therfore must be bundled in"

You are now saying that the EU (or any government) has a right to determine what constitutes "an Operating System"

Why stop at web browsers? Since Microsoft incorporates a backup application into the operating system, then maybe the EU should force then to add Veritas, Yosemite, Backup Assist, CommVault, ARCserve, Symantec Backup Exec, et cetera.
0 Votes
+ -
Well Goverment have all the right they want
Quebec-french 12th Jun 2009
They make laws ,if they make laws you are force to live with them inside the country ... if your are not happy with it leave asap .....

EU or any country what so ever that is a once sovereign can bend or break into shape what ever they see fit ... they where put into place to do that kind of thing .
0 Votes
+ -
That is the difference between us
itpro_z 12th Jun 2009
In the USA, we believe that the government is there to serve our bidding, not the other way around. Government of the people, by the people, and for the people has been our motto for over 2 centuries. Of course, things change, and now we are seeing a push by some to move us toward EU socialism, whether we like it or not. The difference is, we are not sheep, and will not be herded so easily.

Perhaps it is time for a new motto, something along the lines of "People should not fear their government. Government should fear the people" comes to mind in these troubling times.
0 Votes
+ -
I think the point was that once the law is in the books your stuck with it, at least for the time being. And clam up about the "In the USA, we believe that the government is there to serve our bidding" because you might believe that but its dream land.

Look up the statistics, there more incarceration in the USA than any western country. Clearly not the sign of a government thats doing the "bidding" of the people.

If there is one thing the U.S. government is famous for its doing what they want, people or not.
0 Votes
+ -
Laugh all you want
itpro_z 12th Jun 2009
My response was to QF, who asserted that governments can pretty much do what they want. In the USA, we have options. We can respond at the ballot box, by voting out the morons who believe as QF does. We have a Constitution, which protects our rights, even against the tyranny of the majority. We have freedoms: To speak our minds, read what we want, congregate as we please, and even to arm ourselves if we feel the need. We also have the historical precedent of opposing oppression through force, if necessary. If you knew anything about history, you would know that the American people have forced change many times throughout our history, and will do so again.
0 Votes
+ -
@ itpro_z re: History
SimonUK2 Updated - 13th Jun 2009
Your Constitution is based on the French Constitution, as are your Parliamentary houses and Presidential seat. Your legal system is based on the British Legal System.

Infact your whole concept of democracy is based on European governance, so ssshhhh. Learn your history. I wasn't the GOP that invented democracy - their favoured model is French. In fact, historically it can be argued that if it were not for the French helping the fledgling US, the American's may well have lost the War of Independence. Also, your version of history seems to me to be the Hollywood version. Ask the civil rights movement how they view modern American history...

We have the "freedoms" that you mention in Europe too. The gun laws are much stricter of course - but then gun related crime and deaths are lower, can't argue with the statistics on that one. Funnily enough, literacy, the great enabler of freedom is significantly higher in Europe too. It may not have been reported in the US (there is a world outside of your borders) but we have had a major election in Europe recently and the majority is a 'business friendly' conservative representation. You guys (I appreciate its not all Americans, just the verciferous few)need to remember that you didn't invent Democracy. Democracy along with the modern concept of civilisation, was invented in Greece several thousand years ago!

Enough of the history lecture.

I don't know why the EU is gunning for Microsoft, and TBH I'm not sure their motives are entirely justified, but I'll tell you this - it's a two way road. Microsoft are convicted monopolists and serial offenders. They have, as the fanbois on this site constantly point out, about 90% market share (a textbook monopoly). They have either lied under oath about IE (IE is an integral part of Windows) OR completely re-written IE AND a large portion of the Windows code base for 7. Whilst this isn't impossible - it is unlikely. Now they are saying that Windows can be distributed without IE. It's petulant to say the least and the only real people it affects are Microsoft's customers. Bearing in mind the afore mentioned elections in Europe, this move would have been better time last week, don't you think? Still, since Bill Gates announce his retirement, and the idiot Ballmer took over, Microsoft have appeared like a captain-less ship. So for whatever reasons they might have, the EU, I believe, are right to take Microsoft to task.

The biggest question to ask of ALL parties concerned is this;

Since your browsers are free, DOES IT ACTUALLY MATTER?! What do you actually gain?

Opera; If you want your browser to be No. 1, establish better distribution channels and improve your marketing.

Microsoft; you are not allowed to bully vendors into supplying only your browser at point of sale (abuse of monopoly part), unless the hardware is made by you as well. Of course you are allowed to supply a web browser with your OS - to suggest otherwise is foolish. Make sure though, that it can be COMPLETELY removed - without prejudice. Whilst we're at it, IMPROVE YOUR STANDARDS SUPPORT. Webkit is open source and fully compliant if you can't do it yourselves.

@The "Why aren't apple being made to the same?" crowd. As you remind us, ad nauseum, Windows has about 90%. As I mentioned above, that figure is regarded as monopoly. Apple have between 9 and 10% share (actually rather impressive for a single vendor that was on the point of bankrupcy) - that isn't a monopoly whoever you look at it. I'll leave you to come to you own conclusions...
0 Votes
+ -
Actually, governments do *not* have rights. *People* have rights. Governments have *powers* that the governed *allow* them to have.

It seems to me that the sheeple that live in the EU have given their collective (pun intended) government too many powers...
0 Votes
+ -
It is not that simple
GuidingLight 12th Jun 2009
The EU cannot tell a company in Quebec that to sell in their country, they must sign over 25 percent of ownership in that company to the EU.

There are international trade agreements that are in place to keep governments from forcing competitors of [EU] companies into a competative disadvantage, so your once sovereign can bend or break into shape what ever they see fit is just a load of nonsense.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: European regulators, Opera weigh in on Microsoft's Windows 7 E plan
dfwekrdfe3701-24353674902965393353664642483588 11th Nov
bcmutt,good post!

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix