Microsoft's seemingly never ending trials and tribulations with the European Union's antitrust case may have a new twist. Earlier this year, the EU's antitrust agency charged Microsoft with shielding Internet Explorer (IE) from competition by bundling its browser with Windows. This was based on a 2007 complaint by Opera Software. Mozilla and Google have also joined the complaint.
According to Net Applications Inc, a US Web metrics company, IE had 68.2 percent of the browser market in December 2008, and was even less popular in Europe (59.5%). As of April 2009, IE share in Europe is about 48%, with Firefox having 39% of the market.
While the EU has racked up over $2 billon in fines against Microsoft since 2004, their rulings have not had a noticeable impact on market share. You may remember several years ago that the EU required Microsoft to produce a version of Windows XP without Windows Media Player. That software, known as the Windows XP N Edition, was available only in Europe. Sales figures indicate there was virtually no demand for "N" from PC manufacturers, retailers, or consumers. Media Player had about 50% of market share at the time of that ruling. The ruling did not appear to impact those numbers.
Measures the EU is considering may require Microsoft to redesign Windows so IE code could be disabled. They may also try to force numerous browsers into Windows, to dilute Microsoft's advantage with IE. Windows 7 will include the capability to shut off (but not delete) IE if users want an alternative.
Note that Google, which has the dominant search engine, has had a download for Chrome on their page, although its not clear that has helped with Chrome's market share. The EU may just be barking up the wrong tree in its claim that having a built-in browser is an important advantage in this day and age of quick and easy downloads. [Note: Chrome is up to about 2.5% of the market. At its current rate of increase, we expect to see it at 50% by 2034.]
Kerrie Meyler, MVP, MCSE, MCTS, CNA, MA, BA, is an independent consultant and trainer with over fifteen years of experience in IT. While at Microsoft in Field Technical Sales for four years she focused on infrastructure and mangement, presenting at numerous product launches. Kerrie has presented Operations Manager 2007 at TechEd 2007 and MMS 2009 and at internal Microsoft conferences, receiving company recognition and awards including a SPAR MGS award. Kerrie worked with Microsoft Learning to develop functional specifications for the original Operations Manager Microsoft courseware, 2550: Implementing Microsoft Operations Manager 2000 and did the beta teach for that course.She also participated in the alpha walkthrough for the 70-400: Configuring Microsoft System Center Operations Manager certification exam.
She is the lead author of Microsoft Operations Manager 2005 Unleashed, Microsoft System Center Operations Manager 2007 Unleashed, and Microsoft System Center Configuration Manager (SCCM) 2007 Unleashed. Kerrie is currently developing an eBook on Operations Manager 2007 R2.
Check out an excerpt from System Center Operations Manager 2007 Unleashed, Chapter 3: Looking Inside OpsMgr.
Kerrie's latest book, System Center Configuration Manager (SCCM) 2007 Unleashed by Kerrie Meyler, Byron Holt, and Greg Ramsey has been selected as the August, 2009, Microsoft Subnet book giveaway (a $59.99 value). Check out an excerpt from System Center Configuration (SCCM) Manager 2007 Unleashed, Chapter 3: Looking Inside ConfigMgr.
Visit the Microsoft Subnet home page for giveaway details and entry forms.
The Leader in Network Knowledge
bundling is against the law
Nice spin attempt but you got it wrong.
"That software, known as the Windows XP N Edition, was available only in Europe. Sales figures indicate there was virtually no demand for "N" from PC manufacturers, retailers, or consumers."
Consider this case as a rematch of the slavish compliance of Microsoft back then. Of course Microsoft was not ordered to comply like this.
Bundling is not necessarily against the law
Bundling as a general rule is only against the law when a monopolist uses it to foreclose a market to competitors - meaning there is no way anyone else can get in.
XP N was only available in Europe because it was the European regulators that required it; just as it is the European regulators who are proposing the current penalty.
I actually do not understand what you are talking about in your last sentence.
Kerrie Meyler
If a car dealer offered free
If a car dealer offered free oil changes for a year to his customers would that give lube shops the right to sue him for monopolizing the oil change business. Netscape may have had a legitimate gripe when MS first started giving away IE (the first free alternative to their pay-for product), but now there is a thriving market in browsers. This antitrust case is just a scheme for the EU to skim off of MS's success.
Post new comment