Thank God they got what they deserved for forcing people to use crappy IE.

Imagine General Motors making engines for most cars in the world. They are exploiting the situation, forcing car-manufacturers to abide by their demands so they can maximize their profits. This results in inferior, generic products and inflated prices which the consumer must pay for.

So, you don't like the color of your car, well too bad then, you could always paint it yourself right? And if you're too ignorant to know how to do that, then maybe you shouldn't drive a car in the first place!

For what it's worth ;)

The monopolistic policies were already fined and litigated. Having to provide competing software wasn't the issue, it was not being able to supersede or remove the default. That has been fixed and anyone can easily pick whatever color they want with no added cost.

If your logic is true, then Google and Apple should have to follow suit. How much can you change in iOS? How many different stores can you buy software from?

I'm speculating now but I think they were required to provide competing browsers in an attempt to level out the unfair advantage they got earlier. Also, I don't think it was a "mistake", I mean, c'mon now.

But most of all, I'm not too fond of the "if you don't know how things work, you're not allowed to use it" argument. Do you know and care about how your toilet works?

Yes. I always repair my own home and car. Or at least youtube it to see if I can do it.

Point really was that its too simple to be an issue that needs litigation and fines. MS has already paid for and fixed their monopolistic issues. Its time to move on.

I think you're deliberately missing my point. Do you seriously think that you should know how to fix everything to be allowed to use it?

Obviously, MS did not move on since they decided to screw the consumers once again.

Fixing something is not the same thing as changing a preference.

I know how to try on different shoes to find the one I like. Its really no different when it comes to trying out different browsers and no company should be forced to offer a competitors software just because. Anyone can go to Google.com (you know the largest used search engine in world) and get Chrome or use it to get a different browser of any flavor.

Quit with the sensationalist examples. The fact is anyone can very easily install a new browser and make it their default. MS removed the locks and built-in IE features that almost made that impossible to do.

Win95 and 98 had issues with using other browsers and especially making one a default over IE. That is no longer the case. Hell, IE is almost no longer the dominate browser anymore.

Its over. MS changed. MS paid the price. This regulation is bullshit and shouldn't exist. MS should be allowed to have its defaults and the only issue is if its actively blocking the usage of a competitor. Which it isn't. Hell we've had three major versions of Windows without any restrictions on replacing almost any part of Windows applications like Office, Media, or IE.

Yeah, ok, I'm with you buddy. ;)

This. I can understand and am glad that they got in trouble over their IE shenanigans but having to promote other companies browsers is absurd. I can't think of any other instance where a company has to promote another companies product. A huge fine like this over a rule that shouldn't even exist is just incredibly stupid. 

Also who actually gets all that money? If it's the EU that does that is just wrong. It should go to the people affected by this, not some greedy, bloated corporation (which is essentially what most government/agencies are)

I think they made that decision to even out the advantage they gained with their earlier monopolistic policies. And they didn't have to promote the competitors, just make them available.

Not defending EU as a political entity btw. You're right that they are similar to corporations.