Really? I have never said that people are "forced" to use IE and I doubt the EU has either. Don't put words in my mouth. The bundling of IE puts them at an unfair advantage in a completely different market. Internet browsers and operating systems are different products remember.
I don't know about your experiences - but nearly every person that I have advised to use a different browser has either not known that alternatives exist, did not know that they would work on their pc or couldn't be bothered finding it, downloading it and installing it. And that is the reality outside our little bubble. We know better - but the general public does not.
Actually, that is exactly what the EU's case was based on, I suggest you do a little research on the issue. The entire issue behind the EU's complaint was that people are forced to use IE/WMP because it is bundled with Windows.
It isn't Microsoft's fault that people don't educate themselves, and they shouldn't be forced to remove functionality from their products simply because people are uneducated/lazy. People want a product that works from the moment it is installed, you said it yourself, they don't want to be bothered with downloading a seperate browser after installing their OS.
Calculators are a seperate market from OSes too, should Microsoft be forced to strip the calculator from their OS? What about games, should Solitair be stripped because it give them an unfair advantage over regular cards? BiCycle should be all over them about this.
If you want to start the argument about how browsers are a different market, so they shouldn't be included in OSes, then you have to apply it to everything included in the OS, and if we do that we would all be back to install an OS that boots to a command line... Would that really help the consumer any?
Look at the time and effort involved in fighting this case against MS. The reality is that it would be impossible to apply this law (basically take someone to court) universally and all at the same time. The EU can only do what they can. Once they've finished with MS (assuming MS were to comply fully), then I'm sure the EU would turn their attention to others - but they can't do it all at once. So they started with the case/company that would have the greatest effect. Just like they did with Intel. Imposing fines on the biggest player or worst offender first will discourage the smaller players from behaving the same. If the smaller fish continue to behave badly as well then they'll be next in line.
I'm sorry newtekie, I would like to see this policed universally too, but the reality is that the resources aren't there to police everything all at once.
EDIT: Just for clarity I don't have anything against IE8 either - I just like Firefox better.
If the policy can't be enforced, it shouldn't be. And there isn't even a hint that the EU is worried about anyone other than Microsoft in this issue. It also isn't difficult to name multiple defendants in a court case, there is no reason that Apple couldn't be included in the original case with minimal effort and resources.
It is the government's job to make policies, and make sure there is enough resources to enforce those policies. If they don't have enough resources to enforce the policies they create, then they have failed as a governing body.
Though that isn't even the case here, the EU has no intention of apply this policy to anyone other than Microsoft.The EU has actually said that because Microsoft is the biggest, this policy will only apply to them, that was again the basis of their complaint to begin with. Sorry, but the policy is purposefully unfair, which my problem with the whole thing. Well that, and the fact that the whole issue of forcing Microsoft to remove bundled applications is completely stupid anyway...
