Microsoft Corporation on EU Browser Choice Screen Compliance

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
In response to European Commission announcement on October 24, 2012. We take this matter very seriously and moved quickly to address this problem as soon as we became aware of it. Although this was the result of a technical error, we take responsibility for what happened, and we have taken steps to strengthen our internal procedures to help ensure something like this cannot happen again. We sincerely apologize for this mistake and will continue to cooperate fully with the Commission.
 
Was hoping to read something along the lines of
"Dear European Commission,

F*ck you!

Bestest Regards,
Microsoft"

Anyhow, the European Commission is taking it's sweet time delivering the punchline to this joke.
 
Why should Microsoft have to advertise its competitors browsers?

Sorry but, in this case, I have to side with Microsoft. It is not the business of any government to tell them what applications they can and cannot bundle with their own software.
 
Why should Microsoft have to advertise its competitors browsers?

Sorry but, in this case, I have to side with Microsoft. It is not the business of any government to tell them what applications they can and cannot bundle with their own software.

Wow ... Damicatz actually sided with a corporation ... now I am going to watching for the Apocalypse all day long :p :D
 
EU's simply telling Microsoft "Hey MS, this is not America, you don't get to f*k consumers" so I don't see a problem with their enforcing the rules, it's their continent.
 
EU's simply telling Microsoft "Hey MS, this is not America, you don't get to f*k consumers" so I don't see a problem with their enforcing the rules, it's their continent.
Your right, it's their continent, and that's why MS should have said fuck you and just not include a browser at all, let them figure it out.
 
Your right, it's their continent, and that's why MS should have said fuck you and just not include a browser at all, let them figure it out.

Sure, and that would be fine, they just have to play by the EU rules like everyone else.
 
Wow ... Damicatz actually sided with a corporation ... now I am going to watching for the Apocalypse all day long :p :D

Yeah, that's weird. I had to look outside to make sure there weren't any flying piggy type creatures. Since there aren't, I'm going to be paranoid all day about my cat finally unleashing his horde of Mayan Robot Zombies. :(
 
Your right, it's their continent, and that's why MS should have said fuck you and just not include a browser at all, let them figure it out.

That would be great. They should definitely create a 'Windows 8 EU Edition' without a browser, haha.
 
EU's simply telling Microsoft "Hey MS, this is not America, you don't get to f*k consumers" so I don't see a problem with their enforcing the rules, it's their continent.

Whose continent? Governments are fictitious entities and are incapable of holding a natural title to property. Regardless, it is irrelevant. Microsoft is a private company and, so long as they are not aggressing upon someone else's person or property, taking their money is theft.

Wow ... Damicatz actually sided with a corporation ... now I am going to watching for the Apocalypse all day long :p :D

You obviously don't understand libertarianism very well then. Just because someone thinks something is sleazy or immoral does not give them the right to use force against the person doing that particular action. There are other, peaceful and non-violent, avenues, in which you can deal with stuff you don't like such as protesting, speaking out and/or leading a boycott.
 
Can someone explain what it is about a browser that makes a company a monopoly? Beyond increasing brand recognition, how does a company profit from a browser? Hypothetically, if Microsoft directs all of its customers to Firefox, how does the consumer benefit from that choice? The browser's just a means to an end. And how does Firefox benefit from that? They get to say their share of the browser market increased, as if that means anything?
 
Can someone explain what it is about a browser that makes a company a monopoly? Beyond increasing brand recognition, how does a company profit from a browser? Hypothetically, if Microsoft directs all of its customers to Firefox, how does the consumer benefit from that choice? The browser's just a means to an end. And how does Firefox benefit from that? They get to say their share of the browser market increased, as if that means anything?

I think they were more concerned with Opera which is made by a European company ... but the EU loves to regulate stuff ... much more so than the US even ... they made MS sell a version of Windows with no media player due to these "monopoly" concerns ... I get lots of experience dealing with their regulatory fecal matter due to RoHS and REACH environmental requirements ;)
 
Sure, and that would be fine, they just have to play by the EU rules like everyone else.
Like everyone else? So Apple and Linux also has to give people a choice of browsers? Yea I didn't think so.
Rules only seem to apply to certain companies and at the discretion of the EU in hopes of filling their pockets with someone else's hard earned cash.
 
I agree that they should ship Windows to the EU without a browser. There's gotta be tons of AOL CD's still floating around somewhere that people can use if they really want to get on the internet.
 
Can someone explain what it is about a browser that makes a company a monopoly? Beyond increasing brand recognition, how does a company profit from a browser? Hypothetically, if Microsoft directs all of its customers to Firefox, how does the consumer benefit from that choice? The browser's just a means to an end. And how does Firefox benefit from that? They get to say their share of the browser market increased, as if that means anything?
They can make money from advertising by pushing you toward the search engines they want you to use, they can make money by licensing the search bar (Mozilla makes money off Google by having the Google search bar, which Google then makes money from due to advertising).
I think they were more concerned with Opera which is made by a European company ... but the EU loves to regulate stuff ... much more so than the US even ... they made MS sell a version of Windows with no media player due to these "monopoly" concerns ... I get lots of experience dealing with their regulatory fecal matter due to RoHS and REACH environmental requirements ;)
Eh, you take the good with the bad. EU also has good consumer protection laws which the US doesn't have (which is better for consumers).
Like everyone else? So Apple and Linux also has to give people a choice of browsers? Yea I didn't think so.
Rules only seem to apply to certain companies and at the discretion of the EU in hopes of filling their pockets with someone else's hard earned cash.
Apple and Linux don't have a monopoly though. If you buy a computer from Apple, it will come with an Apple OS, that's not a monopoly. If you buy a computer from HP, Dell, Acer, whoever or even just build it yourself, it will typically come with Windows or you will need Windows for one thing or another.
 
Apple and Linux don't have a monopoly though. If you buy a computer from Apple, it will come with an Apple OS, that's not a monopoly. If you buy a computer from HP, Dell, Acer, whoever or even just build it yourself, it will typically come with Windows or you will need Windows for one thing or another.
I really don't care if they have a monopoly or not, fair is fair. If one OS maker has to give users a choice of browsers, or any software for that matter, then they all should have to. I mean that would be the "fair" thing to do right?
 
If you buy an Apple computer, it comes pre-loaded with Safari. No choice.
But, if you buy a Windows powered PC (or even just software), it comes with IE - but they are forced to give you the choice of a different one.
 
The EU is just protecting it's own non-existent OS businesses. The easiest way to do that is to fine the largest employer of OS products in the EU. Duh.
 
Apple and Linux don't have a monopoly though. If you buy a computer from Apple, it will come with an Apple OS, that's not a monopoly. If you buy a computer from HP, Dell, Acer, whoever or even just build it yourself, it will typically come with Windows or you will need Windows for one thing or another.

wut?

It's not microsoft's fault other companies chooses their product t ship. Not to mention, it's not even always as I remember seeing Linux as a choice for some of those companies.

I would've done what the other guy said. Make EU edition with no OS.
 
I really don't care if they have a monopoly or not, fair is fair. If one OS maker has to give users a choice of browsers, or any software for that matter, then they all should have to. I mean that would be the "fair" thing to do right?
I never said either way what I think is fair, but that's the reason Apple and Linux don't have similar issues. MS has a monopoly in the OS market, so the EU doesn't want them shipping with free MS versions of everything else which they DON'T have a monopoly on to encourage a fair market for those other products. Whether or not I personally think it's fair I didn't actually offer an opinion.

But whatever my opinion may be, thems the laws, they are to encourage competition and protect consumers, they have good aspects and they have bad aspects, learn to live within them or don't release your OS in the EU. I'm pretty sure MS don't want to go down that road otherwise they may very well not have an OS monopoly much longer :p
 
Like everyone else? So Apple and Linux also has to give people a choice of browsers? Yea I didn't think so.
Rules only seem to apply to certain companies and at the discretion of the EU in hopes of filling their pockets with someone else's hard earned cash.

If the EU decides that some day Apple is a threat to consumer right in some way, then they'll get in trouble as well, Italy already is punishing them for skimping on warranty, a company has to follow the law where it does business.

The EU is known to be a pro-consumer market relative to down here, so companies have to adjust their business practices accordingly. I doubt MS will have much trouble handling this like the rest of the companies operating there, in the end it'll likely just be a minor short-term PR setback, and it's back to business as usual next month.
 
I agree that they should ship Windows to the EU without a browser. There's gotta be tons of AOL CD's still floating around somewhere that people can use if they really want to get on the internet.

I think it's a great idea as well, but I guess MS preferred to push IE despite the anti-trust complications in that market.

I'm guessing they calculated that the benefit of having it on every install by default, thus holding on to a good chunk of the browser market, outweighed the cost of developing a browser-less version in place of a relatively simple selection menu addition.
 
Back
Top