Which makes Opera’s claim that Microsoft is abusing their monopoly somewhat valid. Then there is the EU playing it way to hardball..

Might be somewhat biased towards Opera as I and Opera is both Norwegian.

Dig through windows and you’ll still see the phrase “Built on NT technology”. This is mid-nineties code. M$ then (around 1999 when win2k came out) said that IE was “part of the operating system” and so *could not be removed*.
They then obfuscated and instigated a whole sleuth of delaying tactics to eliminate all business competitors.
This ‘technical’ statement, as it turned out following the court cases, and now, as it is even more blindingly obvious, was a pack of lie. In fact, more a stack of lies. M$, by their current actions, have admitted that their previous statements about OS-browser integration were all false, which means the fines and penalties are completely justified and that all the companies that Gates-Balmer crushed have complete right on their side.

The police say that a murder case is never closed until it’s solved. There is no time limit.

So why do the majority of commenters slag off the EU for pursuing to completion the prosecution of the absolute criminal activities of Microsoft and make sure that they pay for their law breaking? Furthermore, why do they want to allow M$ to continue in their illegal ways? If they are not prosecuted and then stopped, then like the naughty child they will continue….
I suggest it’s more a comment on the current state of politics in the UK than any rational attempt to see justice done or promote an environment of software compatability.

Justice and the upholding of laws is *the most important thing* in a civilised society. You must *never* let ‘them’ get away with it, no matter how big they are.
This stuff from the last 15 years (yes, 15) is one set of M$ actions. How many of you are future predictors? None. You cannot tell what new technologies are coming and what new monopolistic practices will evolve alongside. The only thing we have is our laws, and they must be upheld at all times.

So to ridicule the people and the system for trying to do this is idiotic and very short sighted. The history of the 20th century proves this.

Anti-MS sentiments work well in Europe because they start at the grass roots, and they mesh well with an anti-English-speaking sentiment. Lots of europeans view the Anglocentric approach of the vast majority of software with thinly disguised annoyance – from where they sit, the imposition of a browser is not that much different from the imposition of a language (and keyboard…). I have no doubt there are non-english blogs and forums filled with exactly the same emotions as we see here, pointed in the opposite direction.

If you chase the “Bureaucrats”, lads, you are missing the point.

The debate is no longer about IE6 vs the new kid on the block FF. All the main browsers are perfectly useable. I use FF and IE8. They are both good products. I think its incredible the way people get so entrenched on this. It was obvious that MS would get their act together and improve IE. Its arguable which is the best browser. Frankly, I find the debate a bit boring now, I just want to get on and surf, and I can do that pefectly well with IE8, FF or one of the others.

The average user will use the default browser whilst they learn, but switch later on to something better once they know a bit more, probably on the recommendation of a friend. Kids are becoming more computer literate so even this will fade in 5 to 10 years.

This is all just rubbish to keep the lawyers occupied. It is probably just going to make things a bit more “difficult”: when I buy a new PC I will have to do something other than use IE to download Chrome (for example). This is clearly going to have a massive impact on my life about every 3 years. [/sarcasm]