Please activate cookies in order to turn autoplay off

EU drops Microsoft browser charges with agreement on 'ballot screen'

The EU's Competition Commission has dropped its anti-trust case following agreement on a 'ballot screen' that will offer users a choice of browsers

The EU's Competition Commission has dropped its browser-based anti-trust case against Microsoft after reaching agreement with the US-based software company about providing Windows users with a "ballot screen" that offers them a choice of browsers. The EU argued that including Internet Explorer with Windows gave it an "artificial distribution advantage".

"More than 100 million European computer users stand to benefit from the Commission's decision today. An even higher number will benefit over the five year lifetime of the commitments made binding on Microsoft with today's decision," claimed EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes.

"The Choice Screen [will] be available from mid-March 2010," she said.

However, at least one of Kroes' claims is simply wrong. She claims that including IE "meant that neither computer manufacturers nor users could disable Microsoft's web browser and replace it with another browser of their choice." In fact, users have always been able to download alternative browsers, and they have been able to choose non-Microsoft programs as the defaults since Windows XP SP1.

In a statement, Microsoft general counsel Brad Smith said: "We are pleased with today's decision by the European Commission, which approves a final resolution of several longstanding competition law issues in Europe. We look forward to building on the dialogue and trust that has been established between Microsoft and the Commission and to extending our industry leadership on interoperability."

The deal covers "specifically the region known as the European Economic Area, which includes 30 nations," says Smith.

Existing Windows users in Europe, including XP users, will also get the ballot screen via a Windows Update download. This will invite them to choose from a list of the 12 most-widely used browsers: Apple's Safari, Google's Chrome, Microsoft's Internet Explorer, Mozilla's Firefox, Opera, AOL, Maxthon, K-Meleon, Flock, Avant Browser, Sleipnir and Slim Browser. The selection will be open to change every six months as market shares change.

According to AP, the deal "will also allow computer manufacturers to ship PCs without Internet Explorer in Europe." This is not what the EU's statement says, which is: "The commitments also provide that computer manufacturers will be able to install competing web browsers, set those as default and turn Internet Explorer off."

If AP's report is accurate (I've asked Microsoft for confirmation*), this would seem to represent a significant defeat for Microsoft, because it has previously argued that, as the creator of Windows, it has the authority to decide what's included in Windows. PC manufacturers can, and do, add things to their Windows installations -- this has enabled them to charge software suppliers for the installation of massive amounts of "crapware," generally to the detriment of consumers. Also, users already get an option screen that allows them to select non-Microsoft programs. I could be wrong (the idea was mooted for Windows 7 this summer, and there were EU-mandated N editions of Windows that flopped miserably), but I don't think PC manufacturers have been able to leave out standard parts of the Windows installation.

* Microsoft says AP's report is "a simplification" and that the IE code will still be present.

But it is also true that Microsoft has already removed numerous useful programs from Windows 7, offering them separately for download as the Windows Live Essentials suite. Microsoft argues that these need to be updated more often than the Windows operating system, and must therefore be on a different development schedule from the three-year Windows cycle. The Internet Explorer browser clearly needs to be -- and now is -- updated more often than that.

Either way, the deal appears to be a victory for outgoing EU commissioner Kroes, who has fined Microsoft €1.7 billion but denied running an anti-Microsoft vendetta.

The anti-trust case was prompted by Opera, a European browser developer, which filed an anti-trust complaint on December 17, 2007.

According to the NetApps website, Opera's browser has a market share of 2.31%, and has already been overtaken by Google's Chrome (3.93%). It has been markedly less successful than Mozilla Firefox (24.7%), which has achieved 10x Opera's market share and is still growing, without the benefit of EU intervention.

Microsoft has been shipping Internet Explorer as part of Windows since 1995.

* See also the Guardian Business story, EU ends competition case as Microsoft offers choice of web browsers


Your IP address will be logged

EU drops Microsoft browser charges with agreement on 'ballot screen'

This article was published on guardian.co.uk at 14.12 GMT on Wednesday 16 December 2009. It was last modified at 02.35 GMT on Thursday 17 December 2009.

Comments in chronological order

Post a comment
  • This symbol indicates that that person is The Guardian's staffStaff
  • This symbol indicates that that person is a contributorContributor
  • candleberry candleberry

    16 Dec 2009, 2:45PM

    This whole business is incredibly petty. Opera is by far the best browser on the market, and I'm disappointed that Opera Software ASA have felt the need to take this sour grapes approach instead of letting the superior product sell itself.

    If this precedent is applied across the board, just what programs will it be lawful to ship with an operating system? Will the makers of competing text editors sue to have notepad taken out of Windows? Will Apple try and get iTunes built in as an alternative to Windows Media Player? It is, to paraphrase Bill Gates in one of his more lucid moments, like making Coke include one can of Pepsi in every six-pack.

  • SteveFarr SteveFarr

    16 Dec 2009, 2:56PM

    "12 most-widely used browsers"

    Of course, to make it completely fair for the competition, the punters out there will not be told which are the good ones and which are the really crap ones.

    Presumably there is an "Undo" option in the oops-I-chose-the-really-crap browser? No thought not.

    "The selection will be open to change every six months as market shares change."

    Presumably Windows will revert back to its original state so we can make the choice all over again? No thought not.

    All the punters out there are geeks who know about this stuff? No thought not.

    Hey. Imagine what the EU could extend this too? The Operating System maybe?

    Or i have a better idea. Yeah we could be made to choose who runs our country.

  • JackSchofield JackSchofield

    16 Dec 2009, 3:04PM

    Staff Staff

    @SteveFarr

    Of course, to make it completely fair for the competition, the punters out there will not be told which are the good ones and which are the really crap ones

    Take your points but it seems the top 5 browsers will get more prominence....

  • Birty Birty

    16 Dec 2009, 3:15PM

    And now, web designers around the world hold their breath and hope 100% of people everywhere in the entire world pick the same browser, thus making our job a lot easier........

  • SteveFarr SteveFarr

    16 Dec 2009, 3:32PM

    @JackSchofield

    Fair point i guess.

    Then again my fav browser Iron doesn't seem to make it into the top 12!

    It surely cannot be fair if some new start-up with a fab new browser doesn't get a look in after March 2010!

    The only fair thing is to do nothing. If punters don't like IE then they need to educate themselves before making a decision. Kind of what the web is for (ironically).

    Now search engines, there's another matter ;-)

  • JackSchofield JackSchofield

    16 Dec 2009, 5:06PM

    Staff Staff

    @candleberry

    Birty,
    If you just write to w3c standards, you can let the browser makers worry about compatibility.

    Sure, then you just have to worry about (a) which standards you use (and how far they are "standards"); (b) whether the different browser developers have interpreted and implemented support for those standards in a compatible way; and (c) what to do about the 25% of users who, after 8 years, still don't use a standards-compliant browser ;-)

    I guess if you're unhappy about companies that don't support 5% of the market (people using Macs) then logically you ought be unhappy about companies that don't support 25% of the market (people using IE6), no?

  • zendancer zendancer

    16 Dec 2009, 5:40PM

    Why has this taken so long ?.Or does Microsoft regard itself too big to be controlled by normal rules ?.USA split Bell telephone company into seven competing companies to stop a monopoly situation.Shame on Microsoft the biggest bully on the block who produce crap software.

  • aTao aTao

    16 Dec 2009, 5:46PM

    Please select your browser:

    1: Safe Internet Explorer (default)
    2: Firefox (Microsoft does not guarantee the safety of 3rd party software)
    3: Opera (Microsoft does not guarantee the safety of 3rd party software)
    1: Fast Internet Explorer (default)
    4: Google's attempt (Warning Microsoft will not support this software)
    1: Ultra wonderful Internet Explorer (default)
    ......

    Hey, they never said it would be a fair ballot. Microsoft had to be battered up and down the place to stop them rubbishing java.

  • SteveFarr SteveFarr

    16 Dec 2009, 5:47PM

    @candleberry

    And my favourite bit...

    "It is as if you went to the supermarket and they only offered you one brand of shampoo on the shelf, and all the other choices are hidden out the back and not everyone knows about them," Kroes added. "What we are saying today is that all the brands should be on the shelf."

    So what the EU are proposing is a supermarket where
    - The top five brand shampoos are at the front of the shelf
    - Another seven brands hidden out at the back of the shelf
    - The rest (including new brands) not even allowed on the shelf

    What a ridiculous comparison with a high street supermarket!

    Someone needs to remind Neelie Kroes that this is the 21st century where we-the-punters can do our shopping on the web - you know, that place you go when you need to actually find stuff you need.

    While i don't think this measure will actually hinder new browser start-ups from getting into the market, it sure as hell is not going to help them. So pretty dumb actually.

    The shampoo analogy is an interesting one though. I always say learn to read the label. And in time the browser product on the outside won't matter. The likes of Microsoft and Google won't care if all the browsers evolve in to a mere skin over a fat sub-system injected into a Gearzy/HTML5 thingy. Maybe Kroes is right and the browser is indeed destined to become just like shampoo product. Ironic again. Hmmmm...

    ...Anyway back to reality (I hate shopping anyway). Where was i? Oh yeah. On the other hand though, if it ain't broke don't fix it. Maybe another reason to switch off updates until you need them.

  • SteveFarr SteveFarr

    16 Dec 2009, 5:47PM

    @candleberry

    And my favourite bit...

    "It is as if you went to the supermarket and they only offered you one brand of shampoo on the shelf, and all the other choices are hidden out the back and not everyone knows about them," Kroes added. "What we are saying today is that all the brands should be on the shelf."

    So what the EU are proposing is a supermarket where
    - The top five brand shampoos are at the front of the shelf
    - Another seven brands hidden out at the back of the shelf
    - The rest (including new brands) not even allowed on the shelf

    What a ridiculous comparison with a high street supermarket!

    Someone needs to remind Neelie Kroes that this is the 21st century where we-the-punters can do our shopping on the web - you know, that place you go when you need to actually find stuff you need.

    While i don't think this measure will actually hinder new browser start-ups from getting into the market, it sure as hell is not going to help them. So pretty dumb actually.

    The shampoo analogy is an interesting one though. I always say learn to read the label. And in time the browser product on the outside won't matter. The likes of Microsoft and Google won't care if all the browsers evolve in to a mere skin over a fat sub-system injected into a Gearzy/HTML5 thingy. Maybe Kroes is right and the browser is indeed destined to become just like shampoo product. Ironic again. Hmmmm...

    ...Anyway back to reality (I hate shopping anyway). Where was i? Oh yeah. On the other hand though, if it ain't broke don't fix it. Maybe another reason to switch off updates until you need them.

  • candleberry candleberry

    16 Dec 2009, 6:00PM

    JackSchofield,

    a) The w3c standards are neither obscure nor arcane. If you are aware of two w3c standards that are directly in conflict with each other, that would prompt a situation where a developer genuinely had to choose which standard to write to, I would appreciate an example, whereupon I will cheerfully concede that you are right and I am wrong.

    b) The browser developers should be the ones worrying about that.

    c) Pandering to them will do nothing to encourage them to do what thy ought, and update their browsers.

    I must have missed the point where Mac users entered the conversation, because I know I never mentioned them. I'm not particularly fussed about Mac users or IE6 users; or IE8 users, Firefox users or Opera users come to that. I'm fussed about there being open standards for the web so that web developers only have to write to a single specification and the onus being on the makers of the browsers to ensure their products meet them. I'm fussed about browser developers dumping a lot of the work that they should be doing onto web developers and their getting away with it.

  • davers232 davers232

    16 Dec 2009, 6:41PM

    >> If you just write to w3c standards, you can let the browser makers worry about compatibility.

    > Sure, then you just have to worry about (a) which standards you use (and how far they are "standards")

    Yea, what's the point in having the one w3c standard, that everyone writes to .. ?

    http://acid3.acidtests.org/

  • rowie4life rowie4life

    19 Dec 2009, 6:35PM

    I don't see why the EU has to stick its nose into something as small and stupid as browsers. If you don't like IE just download something else. It's not Google Windows or Mozilla Windows its Microsoft Windows they have the right to put what ever programme they like on it, as long as they don't block/restrict 3rd party companies.

In order to post a comment you need to be registered and signed in.

|

Comments

Sorry, commenting is not available at this time. Please try again later.

Technology blog weekly archives

Dec 2009
M T W T F S S
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 1 2 3