Impressive growth, though RIM’s still got a way to go before it catches up with its rivals. Opera continues to hold the top spot with a share of 25.4 percent, followed by Apple’s (AAPL) iPhone at 20.8 percent, Nokia’s (NOK) 19.3 percent and 14 percent for the iPod touch. Note as well that Android continues to flat-line, though presumably that will change with the release of new devices using the OS.

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?

Microsoft and the European Commission have canceled a face-to-face hearing in an antitrust case pending against the company over a scheduling dispute, of all things. Seems Microsoft is unhappy with the date of the hearing, which it says falls during a time when key senior regulators will be unable to attend. “The dates the Commission selected for our hearing, June 3-5, coincide with the most important worldwide intergovernmental competition law meeting, the International Competition Network meeting,” Dave Heiner, vice president and deputy general counsel at Microsoft, wrote in a blog post. “As a result, it appears that many of the most influential Commission and national competition officials with the greatest interest in our case will be in Zurich and so unable to attend our hearing in Brussels.”

Microsoft (MSFT) asked the EC to reschedule. It refused, claiming June 3-5 are the only dates that a suitable room is available in Brussels for a hearing. Which is, of course, ridiculous. But no more so than Microsoft’s argument that the hearing will suffer from the absence of European decision-makers, says Thomas Vinje, counsel for Opera, a complainant in the case. Because, in all likelihood, those folks wouldn’t have attended anyway. “Such people simply don’t attend such hearings, and Microsoft knows it,” Vinje told the Financial Times. “The undoubted truth must simply be that Microsoft is afraid of facing the questions and evidence it would face from the Commission and from those aligned against it.”

Among the browser’s new features: an Opera-like Top Sites, which displays a mosaic of frequently visited pages; a Cover Flow visualization of browsing history that allows users to peruse previously viewed Web sites as they would albums in iTunes; improved tabbed browsing; Full Page Zoom, for a closer look at any Web site without degrading the quality of the site’s layout and text; and improved Windows integration that gives Safari a native look when its running on XP or Vista. Safari 4 is also Acid3-compliant, which means it has passed the Web Standards Project’s Acid3 Browser Test.

Notably absent from Safari 4’s new features list: further security enhancements, something that rival browsers have been quite focused on as of late and which Safari could clearly use.

In the interest of public safety, of course. Among those browsers, older versions of Microsoft’s (MSFT) Internet Explorer and Firefox and, presumably, all versions of Apple’s (AAPL) Safari browser that PayPal recently cautioned users against. “Apple, unfortunately, is lagging behind what they need to do to protect their customers,” Barrett said this past February. “Our recommendation at this point, to our customers, is use Internet Explorer 7 or 8 when it comes out or Firefox 2 or Firefox 3, or indeed Opera.”

UPDATE: PayPal now says it never planned to block Safari.

PayPal is developing features to block customers from logging in to PayPal when using obsolete browsers on outdated or unsupported operating systems. An example of such a browser/OS combination might be, for example, Internet Explorer 4 running on Windows 98. In doing so, we better protect our customers from viewing a phishing site through their browser. We have absolutely no intention of blocking current versions of any browsers, including Apple’s Safari, from our Web site.”

So to recap:

• PayPal Chief Information Security Officer Michael Barrett warns against using Safari.

• PayPal publishes a paper, authored by Barrett, saying the company will soon protect users against unsafe browsers that lack phishing protections like blacklists, anti-fraud warning pages and Extended Validation SSL Certificates.
• Safari lacks these protections.
• PayPal says: Go ahead and use Safari. We have absolutely no intention of blocking it. But God forbid, don’t use IE4 on Windows 98.

Know what IE4’s share of the browser market was in 2007?

0.01%.

I’d imagine its share of the market on Windows 98 machines in 2008 is quite a bit less than that. You might as well warn against using IE4 on MS-DOS.