All Things Digital

Skip to main content.

Digital Daily

Great Move, EC. Now We Have to Download IE Ourselves…

windows-7_fueditionWhat a brilliant move.

The European Commission claims that Microsoft’s practice of bundling Internet Explorer with Windows violates European competition laws, so the company strips IE out of European versions of Windows 7. Now the Commission can’t argue that Microsoft’s behavior distorts fair competition in the browser market because, well, there’s no browser.

And if there’s no browser, there’s no need for the “must carry” provision the EC is mulling, which would require Microsoft (MSFT) to ship Windows 7 with a choice of browsers, rather than with IE alone.

And if there’s no “must carry” provision, Microsoft’s rivals in the browser market must continue to bear the costs of their own advertising and distribution (I’m talking to you, Opera). They can’t piggyback on Windows as the provision would have allowed.

And if there are no browsers whatsoever bundled with Windows 7, the European Commission’s constituents are going to be very unhappy. Because they’ll be paying full price for a defeatured version of Windows 7. Microsoft can call it Windows 7: FeU Edition and it can launch with a splash screen that says “Due to the limitations imposed upon Microsoft by the European Commission, this version of Windows does not include a Web browser or media player. It does, however, include the e-mail address of European Commissioner for Competition Neelie Kroes with whom Microsoft encourages you to voice your displeasure.”

And make no mistake, they will be buying Windows. And in the end, that’s what’s important, right? A Windows user browsing the Web with Opera or Firefox is still a Windows user. And hey, they may soon be a Bing user as well.

Well played, Microsoft.

No wonder the EC is already wrinkling its nose at the move. “The Commission will shortly decide in the pending browser tying antitrust case whether or not Microsoft’s conduct from 1996 to date has been abusive and, if so, what remedy would be necessary to create genuine consumer choice and address the anticompetitive effects of Microsoft’s longstanding conduct,” the EC said in a statement issued late Thursday. “In terms of potential remedies if the Commission were to find that Microsoft had committed an abuse, the Commission has suggested that consumers should be offered a choice of browser, not that Windows should be supplied without a browser at all….As for retail sales, which amount to less than 5 percent of total sales, the Commission had suggested to Microsoft that consumers be provided with a choice of web browsers. Instead Microsoft has apparently decided to supply retail consumers with a version of Windows without a web browser at all. Rather than more choice, Microsoft seems to have chosen to provide less.”

Perhaps. But Microsoft’s obligation isn’t to provide more choice. It’s to refrain from restricting it, which is exactly what the EC demanded and exactly what Microsoft is doing here. Sadly for Redmond, it’s likely too little, too late. The tone of the EC’s response and its mention of “Microsoft’s longstanding conduct” clearly suggest that the agency continues to mull corrective action. So in the the end this may be all for naught. But you can’t say that Microsoft didn’t attempt to “restore genuine consumer choice and enable competition on its merits,” as the EC has called upon it to do. It just didn’t take on the costs of advertising and distributing the browsers of its rivals. And, honestly, who can blame it?

Comments

  1. And if there’s no browser on the machine at purchase, how will people download IE? :-)

    Posted by Karlin Lillington at June 12th, 2009 at 6:37 am
  2. Hi Karlin,
    It would be unlikely that the new machine would have no browser at all because the OEM would preinstall all of the modern browsers currently available.

    But, in the very remote event that the OEM would blunder by not pre-installing any browsers, or if Microsoft defiantly prevents the OEM from installing any competing browsers — which seems to be its track record which the EU knows –, there is no reason for the OEM to not make available at least as a pre-loaded installer of all of the browsers.

    If the OEM does not make it difficult to find, and if the installer is designed for easy usage (e.g., so that the operation is not instead designed to appeal to tinkering geeks), a well-designed installer should pop up a well designed dialogue box saying what to do next like give a hierarchical list of the most compliant browsers, with the best on top.

    •••

    Hi John,
    As to “But you can’t say that Microsoft didn’t attempt to ‘restore genuine consumer choice and enable competition on its merits,’” of course it did not and when it appears that it is doing so, it does so piecemeal, reluctantly, and anti-competitively by relying on its predatory monopoly practices to squeeze out better browsers favoring its inferior product. Remember that Explorer is there by default only because MS made it so, not because other browser companies wanted this, so give proper choice; Proper choice is good. It’s democratic and visionary. Anti-choice is anti-democratic and insular and would not be good for American citizens.

    Posted by John Dingler at June 12th, 2009 at 12:54 pm

Add a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment. Sign up here or log in below.

Comments posted on this site must be signed with your full, real name. Please see our Comments policy for details.

Latest Digital Daily Videos

More Videos »

About John

John Paczkowski has been poking fun at the tech industry and the personalities that drive it since 1997. From 1999 to 2007, he wrote the award-winning tech news Web log Good Morning Silicon Valley for the San Jose Mercury News, Silicon Valley's daily newspaper.

Read more »

Ethics Statement

Here is a statement of my ethics and coverage policies. It is more than most of you want to know, but, in the age of suspicion of the media, I am laying it all out.

Read more »

alt.misc

Older at alt.misc »