The European Commission (EC) has granted Mozilla, the open-source collaboration behind the Firefox Web browser, the right to join its antitrust case against Microsoft, a spokesman said Monday.
The Commission, Europe's top antitrust authority, charged Microsoft last month with distorting competition in the market for Web browsers by bundling in its Internet Explorer (IE) browser with the Windows operating system.
If the charges stick, then Microsoft could be forced to change the way it distributes IE, as well as pay a fine for monopoly abuse.
10°
0°
0°
0°
Ad 
20°
...the problem is that we consumers will get the shaft ultimately in this matter because if MS loses the antitrust it won't lower the price of Windows because the prosecution claims it's a "bundle", and bundles are often free software. Furthermore, once Microsoft distributes this "another way" (read: with a price tag or as free but separate on the net or in stores) this will allow every browser, including Firefox and Chrome, to do so as well.
So basically, they're suing them with the hopes that Microsoft will charge for their browser; once Microsoft does, these free browsers with open source support will suddenly become just as business like as Microsoft. If Microsoft doesn't charge, that's where Microsoft loses: Microsoft has to pay for it's labor to make changes to it's software, wheras Firefox is open source, so it doesn't have that burden, and things like research and development are a non-factor.
I'm not saying that they shouldn't, because they have the right to get paid like everyone else; but once this happens, what will happen to the open-source programmers that put all of their time and ideas into this that don't get a check? They get screwed, and since you don't really have rights to money regarding open source contributions, I don't think a lawsuit against them will stand in court.
Just a semi-educated guess though; waiting to see what happens, myself.
This could be the final nail...or at least nailed up half way...
FF FTW
Microsoft is a software developer who makes operating systems for a separate market; the PC market. Dell, Intel, HP, Acer, and other PC manufactures use Windows to run their products.
Personal computers are still DOS based and Windows lays on top to make navigation and user interface easier. Windows is just a program that runs off of DOS, that is why you always have to sit through a DOS bootup before starting Windows. Mean while Apple's personal computers (Macs) do not have DOS and its interface can not run independently from the hardware. People mistakenly think that Leopard works and engineered the same way Windows is. It is not.
Microsoft in the 80s copied Apple's user interface, but avoided (narrowly) a lawsuit buy claiming that Windows worked in conjunction with DOS. There for the programming and engineering of Windows was different.
Microsoft is nothing more than a software vendor servicing a separate market and product. Apple computer and its operating system are one in the same. In order to make an Apple computer run independently from Leopard OS you'd have to essentially change how the Apple computers work.
That's BS. Safari is based on Konquerer, the KDE open source browser. Following your rule, Apple abuses open source.
However, open source also works the other way. Depending on the license, products may be charging a fee - or not. Also, changes to code based on open source (and most use the GPL, or LGPL) usually get contributed back into the original source code, and I think that what Safari/Apple is contributing back to the open source community.
Just because MS would charge for their browser doesn't allow Mozilla do the same without recognizing its contributors. Not without taking the risk of getting suit to death by its contributors.
coz mozilla exec said that they don't want to be bundled with Windows ( http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news... )
but i do hope they will strongly go up against Microsoft, only then will Microsoft compete better (i.e. bring out better IE) or IE will just die basically.. either way it's a win-win for us consumers :)
All though I wonder what MS will cook up to make this 'browser war' more fair if (or when) they lose..
If MS knew anything about playing fair Netscape would still be around.
i donno about that, at the time imo internet explorer was infact better than netscape.. yes my opinion, however, IE become more and more sloppy by the release, and eventually mozilla came out, pretty much same as netscape, didn't really get into mozilla, then firefox came, and i pretty much loved it and switched fully within a few weeks..
point is.. IE used to be a good browser IMO..
As I recall, at one time Netscape held the lead when the major competition was them, IE and AOL with AOL falling fast. Then, with PCs tied up though Windows through the business sector, not home, day MS declared its assets proprietary, restricted, and Netsacpe's reliability nosed dived. IE became the only browser.
I said it once already: the only reason we have Firefox, other browsers, is because MS lost an anti-trust suit during the Clinton Administration. Other suits were pending, but they got dropped when Bush took office.
You cant strip IE from windows. Windows itself uses the explorer for a lot of tasks. Also, if you strip IE. How you gonna download opera or firefox browser?
Also, firefox (my fav browser) is not pro of this lawsuit. Is opera that is trying to gain some ground. And this goes only for europe.
That is pretty funny. Unbundling IE gives people no fallback browser to download other better browsers for free.
I really doubt mozilla/opera will win this lawsuit, because windows is really a bundle of products with an operating system. If they win, what's to stop maple from suing M$ to no longer include calculators with their system. Or other wireless network connection wizards suing over the default in windows.
I really don't think it'll turn out. When windows was bundled with PC's the case was better, because it was being bundled with a different company's product. In this case, IE is really already a part of another windows product.
Go Mozilla sue MS!!! You have our support
When we didnt have many choices for internet surfing, Mozilla came through in the clutch with something new, basic and excellently crafted for speedy performance. Now there are a lot of other competitors, but I have not used IE since 99. Microsoft needs to be brought to justice for this, they've tried things like this before, and have gotten caught. Enough is enough, if people can do something better than you, dont try to bring them down, try to BETTER yourself. They've been doing the same shadiness for so long and we all put up with it...well I for 1 hope Mozilla gets what they deserve.
Mozilla is an awesome software company and i hope they hit Microshaft where it hurts... especially now that MS is messing with Firefox without permission
should be allowed to package IE with Windows. There is nothing wrong with that. Where the problem would be if they required you use IE to surf the web.
I have yet to find one PC where i couldn't get Firefox on it. So what is the issue? Take 15 mins to download and install Firefox, or put the exe on a flash drive and take less then 5 mins to install.
Other then that, i don't have any pity for the giant Micro$oft.
That IE can't be removed from Windows. Its always there wasting resources.
MS could simply offer IE on a separate web portal. Or add a service to Windows, which allows you to download a browser of your choice (need a browser to download a browser, no ?). By doing so, this gives an equal opportunity to everybody, incl. MS. That's all they want.
will this mean ubuntu, linux ect will have to offer IE ?
Im glad i got IE free with windows as i would struggle to download ff without it !
No. But they've put invisible unknown and unauthorized updates into Firefox.
win for the sake of humanity!!!! love firefox.
And people ask, "Why do European have to pay more for consoles, games, software, hardware, etc"? HAHAHA!
Here is what's going to happen.
Software/hardware Price + Lawsuit Price = customer price.
Obviously these lawsuits are bias since Mac distributes Safari on their OS too... but no one look at them and say a word.
My primary browser is Firefox and I used IE to download firefox.
I mean don't a browser needs to be install to allow people to download another? Since the OS maker does make a browser isn't that the obvious choice? As I said this is the same case with Apple... what Mozilla should do is Make their own OS so they can bundle it with their browser. lol.
What Microsoft should do is ship windows without a browser in Europe so they can use their balls to browse the internet to firefox.com in order to download it... or better yet order a firefox disc and wait a few days before installing it.
In the "olde" days when you signed up for a provider, you were given the option to download several browsers. Including IE.
Exactly Godmars290... and you needed something like AOL or some software install in your computer that you had to get by mail or at some retail store.
Today you do not use any of that crap... so how do you suggest people will get Firefox if OS do not even come with browsers?
This lawsuits are stupid because it will make things complicated for people... and it do not benefit the user at all... How does it benefit the user that the OS comes without browser now they have to get the software via other means and install it themselves before they can browse the internet.
Why do you think linux is what it is today? because users need to be advance enough to know how to set it up. And to resolve that versions of linux that come with a bunch of pre-install software are sold.
What's going to be next? suing Microsoft for adding Sound drivers, pre-intall fonts, icons, etc?
There was a similar lawsuit for Media Player... I mean... those are basic software that everyone should get out of the box. softwares that apple includes in their OS too. hell... Linux include software like that too... Microsoft includes the software that they make.
This kind of crap make things worst... this is the reason why the OS does not come with anti-virus.
What people should do is make a more competitive product than what microsoft offers... period...
take firefox for example... it's capturing market shares even though it does not come with windows or mac... because is a great browser.
And why is that do you think? Some OS manufacturer - who will remain nameless - infusing their browser into their software, which everyone was already using by default, turned around and restricted access to said software forcing competing browsers out of business? That's pretty much how Netscape died.
The only reason we have Firefox, besides the fact that IE sucked ALOT more than it does now, was that MS lost an anti-trust lawsuit that re-opened that access.
Below:
Correct me if I'm wrong - as I know most of you will - but don't most if not all modern viruses exploit the connection of IE to Windows? Isn't that enough of a reason to at least have the option to delete it?
agree with Bladestar on this one. Web surfing have become such an integral part of a computer, that an OS without a browser would be inconvenient. This argument of bundling IE with the OS may be valid when people were just starting to learn what the Internet is (Netscape), but most people nowadays know how to download and install a different browser like Firefox. It explains the increasing popularity for Firefox (I tried and like Chrome as well).
It's true you can't remove IE from Windows easily, but it doesn't hurt it either. It doesn't take that much space on the hard drive.
You can also bundle your competitor's browser, but does it mean that a new disc need to be pressed each time a new browser comes out?
I like having the option not having to download a browser from the get go. You can always choose to download and use a different browser, but it is nice that you don't have to.
You don't hear people complaining about bundling solitaire or the calculator with the OS... While I dislike a lot of MS 's business practice, in this particular case, I would prefer having IE come installed.
However, going back to when browser first started, bundling IE for free really did put Netscape out of business... On the other hand, I don't remember having to pay for Netscape so I didn't know how Netscape planned to stay in business either...
Also, while Netscape was a bit more stable compared to IE, it has its own share of problem as well. So competitively speaking, it wasn't that much better than IE. Firefox VS IE7 on the other hand...
** EDIT **
Not that I am supporting the Anti-competitive behavior of MS, I'm just saying taking I.E. out of the standard install may not be the best option.
A browser is important, but that doesn't mean you can't let the person choose. That's all this comes down to and IE sucks really really bad.
You don't need a disc or anything, if you wanna ship your product to a vendor and force people to install extras from your company why not put Firefox right on the Windows installation disc and upon booting up a new connection you get to choose from the several available ones?
It's not hard to do.
If microsoft want to monopolize a whole industry, go for it, but if they think there won't be without opposition they're clearly wrong.
"If microsoft want to monopolize a whole industry, go for it, but if they think there won't be without opposition they're clearly wrong."
That's why almost everyone I know now use Firefox.
Bladestar you are one smart fella, I like how you think. Bubbles to you Sir.
Thank you Microsoft for being the browser of choice for the first 5 minutes. Without you bundling your browser with Windows, it would be kinda hard for me to get Firefox.
Honestly, I love Firefox. I use it plenty, but Microsoft has every right to bundle their free software with their operating system. Firefox is free the same way. They could make an OS and bundle their browser with it. And at the same time, why aren't people going after Apple for including Safari in their OS? This case isn't brought about because of some injustice. It's pure Microsoft hate.
I really don't care what your reason is for hating Microsoft. Recognize that it's a double standard just because you have this half-baked concept of what an "evil corporation" is.
How hard is it to imagine a "disposable" browser that only allows you to setup your system to a provider and download a full browser of your choice?
that might work if other people didn't make a disposable browser and sue microsoft for making the market on disposable browsers uncompetitive.
.
can you lend me one :)
you get a bubble but i expect you to contribute.
This is the such a stupid lawsuit. The EU just wants more money. How many lawsuits have they put up against MS now?
but you could technically choose your browser when loading windows.
For the record what is hard about going to start+control panel+add remove programs+windows components+remove IE?
but as gchamplin pointed out unless you have a choice of multiple browsers when loading windows then you need IE to get another browser.
MS haters, IMO the OS is an integral part of the OS, how come I only ever seem to see lawsuits against MS, this is nothing more than a which hunt.
If MS do eventually go down which they wont, but if they do then send my love to all the newbies to the job cues, oh and while your at it why not cancel the Bill and Belinda foundation. Pathetic.
name one other product, by ANY other company that is found it so many hands...
Honestly, I'm sick of other companies competing with Microsoft through litigation. But I suppose if you swallow that litigation as a means to pull down your competition is a fair strategy, then anything Microsoft does is fair game, too.
needs elaborating.
But this time it is in Europe...You think Microsoft will ever change there business practices...Well just look at the Gaming industry
That makes no sense to me. It's two of their products being put together. What the hell?
but microsoft built the windows so they should choose whom ever to be put on it right???
If MS is forced to not bundle IE with their OS, what are we going to use to download firefox?
=P