| WereKitten said: What does "not illegal" mean, exactly? They've been fined and requested to alter their products and conduct, so their position has been found legally faulty by courts and commissions. As for them not having a monopoly in the browser market that doesn't excuse them from exploiting the one in the OS market, because that makes the browser market a not fair play ground and that is against the interest of the european citizens. The fact that they have now 70% of the browser market instead of 99% is not fundamental. In absence of exploitations of their dominant OS position maybe they could have 20% by now, so that's still a 50% market share that the competitors could feel has been held by dubious means (I'm exemplificating, here, not giving realistic numbers). More importantly, the deliberation that the user must be prompted to choose for a browser is a statement that the browser and the internet access has become so important that informing every user that she/he has an option comes before MS own decision about how to present their product. In absence of such a step an entire first generation of non-savy users grew up with the impression that the internet was the blue "e" icon on their desktop, and never knowing that they could even choose a different browser and get a better use out of the web. Not to speak of the clock of web content development being set back maybe 10 years by the former stranglehold of IE5-6. Again, forcing to inform the user that such a choice is at least an option in the OS that is in an indisputed monopolistic position is a pragmatic stance, and one I think is in the interest of every user. |
Nonsense. If this were in the interest of every user then they would be forcing all major OS companies to do the same. What is good for the goose is good for the gander, as they say. So long as it is solely targetted at one company then this decision is just crap. Unless they want to waste the same ridiculous amount of money on legal fees if/when someone else dominates the OS market then they should be looking for a universal cure, and not a specific one. This is just a penalizing one company because they can get away with it. It is bullshit that should not be tolerated.
