Opera Files Antitrust Suit Against Microsoft

[SDRacer48]

Opera Software has filed an antitrust suit against Microsoft in the EU, accusing it of stifling competition by tying IE to Windows.

 

Opera Software has filed an antitrust suit against Microsoft in the European Union, accusing it of stifling competition by tying its Internet Explorer Web browser to Windows, the Norwegian company said Thursday.

 

The complaint, which was filed with the European Commission on Wednesday, says Microsoft is abusing its dominant position in the desktop PC market by offering only Internet Explorer as a standard part of Windows, and hindering interoperability by not following accepted standards with IE.

 

Opera is asking the Commission, the executive branch of the European Union, to force Microsoft to unbundle IE from Windows, or include other browsers as a standard part of its operating system. It also wants it to require Microsoft to adhere to industry standards with its Web browser.

 

Article

These lawsuits seem ridiculous to me. First, Windows Media Player gets stripped out, then they want Internet Explorer gone.

 

Where is the lawsuit against Ubuntu for only including Firefox standard?

Where is the lawsuit against Apple for only including Safari standard or iTunes standard?

 

I don't use Internet Explorer, but it is besides the point. Anyone in this sue happy world is willing to try to bring down the big guys, the guys who did it right.

[articquad]

Very, very interesting. But I doubt anything will happen. =/

[apowerr]

Where is the lawsuit against Ubuntu for only including Firefox standard?

Where is the lawsuit against Apple for only including Safari standard or iTunes standard?

I agree, this is a very frivolous lawsuit.

[A Nonny Moose]

They're going for the big fish first. Just wait for them to attack the smaller fish.

[robotskip]

Yeah, cursed Microsoft for stopping me installing Opera ! I guess they're just sad that Opera still hasn't quite taken off on the desktop (Despite being quite good) so they're resulting to desperate measures. Also, in Vista IE is less 'integrated' than previous versions, and besides, isn't IE itself really not that integrated but rather it's rendering engine which is widely used by thousands upon thousands of apps, like Dreamweaver for example?

[Dainas]

If there's anyone that deserves suing its all the various entities involved with Firefox, open source spirt my ass. I do not know how a browsers propagation could possibly get more cutthroat.

 

Microsoft, its, well Microsoft, it makes the OS in question so it should be allowed to package what it pleases with it. No one loves IE unduly unlike the above browser.

[idividebyzero]

They dont want IE bundled with Windows? So how are people supposed to download a web browser to actually use? Magic? Its like making people download their ISP software before they can connect to the internet.

[Colonel]

They dont want IE bundled with Windows? So how are people supposed to download a web browser to actually use? Magic? Its like making people download their ISP software before they can connect to the internet.

Bundle Firefox.

[Hagar]

I think the crux of the matter is not that IE is bundled with windows, rather that ie is *integrated into* windows. Windows update shows IE7 as a "strongly recommended" update, and as the underlying functionality is used for system functions, this makes it very inconvenient to have windows without IE. Comparing this to FF on Ubuntu is a little off-mark, similarly, Finder & the rest of OS X works just fine without Safari. A more accurate comparison would be KDE and Konqueror, which is integrated both as a file and web browser (and ftp/sftp client & more) .

 

As far as the lawsuit is concerned, I don't know... I'm glad someone is making this point, and it seems the courts are the only place such points can be made these days.. It's just a shame things have to be that way, and obviously Opera hopes to gain from this themselves.

 

If this lawsuit pushes MS to adopt proper standards for IE then it is a good thing, but most likely, the only ones to benefit from this will be the lawyers.

[Colonel]

I think the crux of the matter is not that IE is bundled with windows, rather that ie is *integrated into* windows. Windows update shows IE7 as a "strongly recommended" update, and as the underlying functionality is used for system functions, this makes it very inconvenient to have windows without IE.

 

If it makes a difference, Vista's Windows Update is its own app and doesn't/shouldn't need (afaik) IE7 to run.

[Hagar]

If it makes a difference, Vista's Windows Update is its own app and doesn't/shouldn't need (afaik) IE7 to run.

 

My bad, I'm not a vista user.

[rob356]

(When I saw the title I thought that Oprah, you know the talk show host, was filing a suit against Microsoft, silly me.)

Sorry Oprah Software, there is almost no chance of them removing it, but they might give an easy removal option.

[Eddie Turfboer]

I think you're all missing the point. The way we see operating systems now is a bundling of features and the things we can do with these bundled applications. However, what an operating system actualy is the system that lets you run application on hardware. Giving this, opera is saying that they should be equaly able to let their application run on the operating system as microsoft is with IE. Thereby saying that the consumer should be able to choose.

[SDRacer48]

I think you're all missing the point. The way we see operating systems now is a bundling of features and the things we can do with these bundled applications. However, what an operating system actually is the system that lets you run application on hardware. Giving this, opera is saying that they should be equally able to let their application run on the operating system as Microsoft is with IE. Thereby saying that the consumer should be able to choose.

 

I understand this, but the consumer IS free to chose which browser he/she would like to use. It is called go to opera.com or mozilla.com and download the browser of your choice. You do have a choice, just because Microsoft doesn't throw it in your face doesn't mean you don't have a choice. It just means Microsoft knows good business, and knows how to run one.

 

I just don't understand why Microsoft, a software producer, cannot produce the software they want. I mean we pay $100 - 300 USD for an operating system and all it includes. Like hell is anyone going to pay $100 for an operating system without a multimedia player, or a internet browser, or calculator, or notepad ready to go out of the box. Pretty soon someone will try to sue Microsoft because they only include the NT kernel.

 

I think the crux of the matter is not that IE is bundled with windows, rather that ie is *integrated into* windows. Windows update shows IE7 as a "strongly recommended" update, and as the underlying functionality is used for system functions, this makes it very inconvenient to have windows without IE.

 

Why are companies just now trying to change that. I mean, Internet Explorer has always been the base of Windows Explorer, or Windows Explorer has always been the base of Internet Explorer. It's been that way since 95 to what I can remember. If that is Opera's problem, that is ridiculous and is like asking apple to remove Finder.

[rollcage]

Bundle Firefox.

 

If that ever was the case they'd probably have to bundle every single browser that exists, just making for a really bloated install. Don't agree that's it's wrong for MS to bundle IE, but it would be nice if they would follow standards.

[apowerr]

I think you're all missing the point. The way we see operating systems now is a bundling of features and the things we can do with these bundled applications. However, what an operating system actualy is the system that lets you run application on hardware. Giving this, opera is saying that they should be equaly able to let their application run on the operating system as microsoft is with IE. Thereby saying that the consumer should be able to choose.

I guess I still miss the point: I still think this lawsuit is retarded. In Vista IE isn't very integrated at all, and with Default Programs you can easily completely replace IE with the browser of your choice. In fact default programs is built right into the Start Menu, so you can easily customize your default web broswer, email client, media player, image viewer etc with a couple of clicks. Start Menu w/ Default Programs

[InorganicMatter]

I guess I still miss the point: I still think this lawsuit is retarded. In Vista IE isn't very integrated at all, and with Default Programs you can easily completely replace IE with the browser of your choice. In fact default programs is built right into the Start Menu, so you can easily customize your default web broswer, email client, media player, image viewer etc with a couple of clicks. Start Menu w/ Default Programs

I have to agree. With Vista, Microsoft has made a real effort to get IE and the operating system separated. It really has less to do with lawsuits and antitrust, and more to do with security. Under XP, Internet Explorer and Windows Explorer were one and the same, and IE ran with Admin priveleges by default, hence the "security problems" that Windows is famous for. IE7 and Vista have completely stepped away from this paradigm due to security - IE is a separate application that runs in its own sandbox. It is not an integrated part of the OS, and can easily be removed with an ISO customizer like vLite. I could side with Opera if they had filed this suit 10 years ago, but now is way too late and many dollars short.

 

The fact remains that the Explorer framework which unerlies Windows and IE is the same. The difference here is that Explorer is more of a rendering framework, and less of a browser now. It Opera wants to step up and fill that plate, they can go right ahead, but I think the smarter business decision is the stick to browsers, seing as how they can't even get that much right.

[Eddie Turfboer]

I understand this, but the consumer IS free to chose which browser he/she would like to use. It is called go to opera.com or mozilla.com and download the browser of your choice. You do have a choice, just because Microsoft doesn't throw it in your face doesn't mean you don't have a choice. It just means Microsoft knows good business, and knows how to run one.

 

I just don't understand why Microsoft, a software producer, cannot produce the software they want. I mean we pay $100 - 300 USD for an operating system and all it includes. Like hell is anyone going to pay $100 for an operating system without a multimedia player, or a internet browser, or calculator, or notepad ready to go out of the box. Pretty soon someone will try to sue Microsoft because they only include the NT kernel.

Why are companies just now trying to change that. I mean, Internet Explorer has always been the base of Windows Explorer, or Windows Explorer has always been the base of Internet Explorer. It's been that way since 95 to what I can remember. If that is Opera's problem, that is ridiculous and is like asking apple to remove Finder.

 

You understood me correctly. I think it is indeed not correct to have such a law suite. I am not against adding such programs to a operating system. I only think that people should choose whatever they want to run. In Vista it is less integrated then in XP. In XP you are not able to fully change to Opera or Firefox, whilst some programs (external or internal) will use IE.

 

So, XP is not so great, Vista is better...concerning this topic at least (or only).

[idividebyzero]

Bundle Firefox.

 

And how much is Mozilla willing to pay for this privilege?

 

Any software company can bundle whatever the hell they want with Windows. Look at Dell with all that fun bloatware installed without user consent, Im sure people would just love for all Windows installs to end up with 175 different trial programs since to not include 175 different trial programs would be anti-competitive and anti-consumer. They just have to pay money to do so. If Opera or Mozilla want their browsers set as the default so badly then they can do what EVERY OTHER SOFTWARE COMPANY IN THE ENTIRE WORLD does and pay money. I think there was a computer company that did exactly that.

 

Web browsers are no different than any other software, they do not deserve special treatment, to do so would be way more criminal than bundling IE with windows. Why stop at browsers? Why shouldnt we have 20 different anti virus programs installed so we can make our own decision? Why not have 50 different media players installed so we can make our own decision? Why not have 500 different spyware applications installed so we can decide which ads are right for us? If browsers get special treatment then thats exactly where we are heading.

[robotskip]

+1 to what most of you guys have said and hasn't Mozilla proved that IE being with Windows is not such a big thing? They built an excellent browser and it took off, for various reasons, despite the apparent antitrust doings by Microsoft.

[Eddie Turfboer]

Im sure people would just love for all Windows installs to end up with 175 different trial programs since to not include 175 different trial programs would be anti-competitive and anti-consumer.

 

Yes, and no. I agree with you that installing all these applications on a default windows install would be too much. The only thing I desire is that: If I want to replace a default program it should be able to be completely replaced by the new default. So, all instances that need browser do in fact use this new default. This is in current programs never the case! For instance, thunderbird has embedded firefox and most other programs on windows use IE to render.

[fatshitcat]

I agree with letting Microsoft bundle IE.

However, I have noticed quite an interesting bit about this non-existent "integration" in Vista.

I use Safari on Vista Ultimate, and the new Start menu, and Safari is set to show as my browser, and every time I start up IE or Start Menu Properties, i got IE7 as my browser on the start menu.

It's not revolting, just ...curious

[Jesus05uk]

I remember when someone tried to sue Microsoft for stifling competition with Windows Media Player.

I don't think it's really going to help much, or succeed. But i'd love to see Firefox on Windows as default, just for the lols.

[Colonel]

If that is Opera's problem, that is ridiculous and is like asking apple to remove Finder.

IE != Finder.

Actually, that'd be like asking Apple to remove Safari. Finder isn't a web browser.

 

But yeah, Firefox has shown that MS bundling IE in Windows isn't that big of a problem. They've been able to gain double digits in the browser marketshare with IE still being included with every Windows install. Opera is just talkin out their rear...

 

However, I will agree with Opera that MS should comply more with W3C webstandards, as it is a big pain to recode a website just to play nicely with IE's own standards.

[Eddie Turfboer]

IE != Finder.

Actually, that'd be like asking Apple to remove Safari. Finder isn't a web browser.

I can second that, it is indeed not. However I tend to think that although Finder is a great part of OS X you should be able to replace it with GoogleDesktop or whatever it is called. It is al about letting the consumer freely choose what he or she wants to use. You could also argue that a consumer chooses to use the operating system (for instance Mac OS X) for its included programs and not for its base structure, but that is an different discussion.