http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21684329

So Microsoft fined yet again for not giving users a choice of alternative browsers that IE.

Can someone explain to me a good reason why the EU has not gone down hard on Apple over Safari on Mac products - surely same situation?

because they are not MS. Or a less faceatous answer is due to Apple computers (not iOS devices) have such a pittiful market share that it is not seen in the same light.

So, it was a "technical error" that led to the browser choice being taken away since Windows 7 SP1? Yeah, right - can't blame them for trying to get away with removing it, but a court order is a court order. Surely, they would have known they'd get found out at some stage before the 2014 timeframe that they'd agreed to keep the browser choice in there for?


Probably because it's a lower market share, I guess. It was suggested that Microsoft were using their market share advantage to influence people's choice of web browser. Saying that, I'd welcome such a ruling that all PC/Mobile operating systems include a range of web browsers when first starting it up. It's about time that Apple too offered its users a choice.

Internet Explorer has improved a lot since this ruling was forced onto Microsoft - in the face of competition, they've upped their game and made their own web browser better, which is only a good thing. Apple have become complacent in recent years and Safari does have some real annoyances that would hopefully be fixed it they had some competition from the outset. Bring it on, I say.

Interestingly, I know very few people (I'm not counting people on here as I don't know) who use Safari. They are mainly people who had used Firefox/Chrome on Windows/Linux.

I find it interesting that Linux hasn't been picked up on things like not offering a choice of web content retrieval tools, I regularly see wget installed, but have never seen curl installed by default.

Because you are not committed to Safari. You can delete Safari without any impact on the OS.

The options thing is there in Windows 8. It's pissing annoying, quite intrusive and doesn't actually contain my choice of browser.

Thanks a [LIFTED] bunch to the EU for that piece of [LIFTED] appearing.

Isn’t it different situation with Apple? Safari can be uninstalled. Can IE? Can Windows operate without IE in place? As I understand it, a lot of core Windows display work is done by IE that including is mandatory to make it work.

Of course, if you feel that Apple are being unduly favoured, make a complaint about their default browser to the EU.

Tempting thought

I have a feeling if it were a valid complaint, Microsoft would have used it as a defence in their case. Given the situation, we may assume either a) They didn't use it because they figured it wouldn't work, suggesting it's a non-issue or b) They did use it and the court threw it out, suggesting it's a non-issue.

safari can be removed from the OS at any time and another browser be used in its place
IE can not be removed from windows at any time after the release of XP SP1
others browsers can still be used but most don’t bother

not withstanding that MS lied at the original case, they stated 'IE can not be removed from the OS'
that was an out right lie as IE could be removed from all versions of 9x, win2k and the first version of XP
you had to use an install program called 98lite for 9x, w2klite for win2k, and XPlite for the first version of xp ...

Because of all this BS Microsoft duplicated all the core functionality many years ago. It's trivial to uninstal IE if you want to. You un-tick one box.

Of course, the result of duplicating all that code is unnecessary bloat and reduced performance. Just to satisfy a bunch of total f*cktards without the understanding of logic a normal 4 year old has. There's a million other examples of software which could equally be considered anticompetitive or whatever. Like "Notepad" and "Paint".

MS has never forced anyone to use anything. Unlike many PC manufacturers who peddle awful AV products with "free trials" that cripple your machine and demand your credit card details after a few months. The same AV products that have been known to render your PC unusable when you try to uninstall them. The same AV products that used European Law to ban Microsoft from making Windows secure.

Indeed. I've never used IE. Back in the day it was Netscape, then Mozilla, then Firefox.
But I see no point in this fine. If you know about PC's you could download something else, if you don't then MS are making your life easier.

Is this the same way Apple are 'making your life easier' by having a curated and walled app store on their phones?

Nope. They're stopping you downloading stuff they don't want you to have or don't approve of. MS never stopped anything. Your PC, your choice.

The iPhone is a very good example of where legislation would be easier to justify. They actively prevent you from using alternative software in a way no version Windows ever has on the desktop.

At their height before competition from Android, they must of had practically all of the domestic smart phone market.

The question is - why should anyone be forced to sell open devices? It's never been the case historically. In fact, copyright and patents are there to protect a manufacturer's right to sell closed products.