EU fails at attempting to control web browser monopoly

The European Union has been on Microsoft’s case for most of this year, demanding that it give users an option to choose a web browser instead of defaulting to Internet Explorer. This is to supposedly stop it’s “unfair” monopoly of  the browser market. First of all I’d like to say that I’m not an Internet Explorer (IE) user, and haven’t been for the past 7 or so years. I’ve been using Opera as my main browser and occasionally use IE or Chrome for compatibility; I never really liked Firefox much.

To elaborate, the EU wants Microsoft to include a program in Windows that will list, download, and install different web browsers for the user to choose from. These include Internet Explorer, Safari, Opera, and Chrome. This seems great for the consumer doesn’t it? The novice computer user who doesn’t know about alternative web browsers will be instantly informed and given a choice. The general consensus is, after all, that IE is definitely not the best browser out there, and is certainly not known for it’s adherence to web standards.

So what’s the problem then? I believe that Microsoft is being treated very unfairly in this matter. Let’s analyze this from their point of view. Someone buys a PC that runs Windows. Microsoft includes it’s very own web browser with it. It couldn’t possibly ship an OS without it. Can anyone really imagine an OS shipping without a web browser? Of course not! They have to include a web browser, and of course, it’s their own. Mac OS X ships with Safari, and Ubuntu (which I’m using for the sake of argument since it’s the most popular Linux distribution) ships with Firefox. Is anyone complaining about that? It certainly seems to be the common practice with OS’s across all hardware platforms. Why is Microsoft being singled out simply for being successful?

Consider this: When you buy an iPod (which is by far the most popular portable audio player) it asks you to download iTunes. It does not (officially, anyway) work with any other music software. Is this not an unfair monopoly as well? Why can’t I use Windows Media Player? Or better yet, why doesn’t it just let me drag and drop music into it using a file manager? This can also be considered a monopoly. As if that wasn’t enough, Apple then proceeds to install Safari on your system along with iTunes unless you manually opt-out, which most users will not even notice. Now this is something that should be frowned upon.

I’m not saying Apple is bad and Microsoft is good. I’m just saying it is unfair for Microsoft to be legally obligated to cripple its market share, and everyone else gets out free. Isn’t Apple also forcing Safari onto OS X users by including it as the default browser on their systems? They should also be forced to include a  browser selection screen with alternatives. It would only be fair.

Imagine that Wal-Mart was legally forced to show its competitors’ prices next to their own price tags, so as to give the consumer a freedom of choice. Seems silly doesn’t it? Why would they advertise a competitors’ goods? No one forced the consumer to walk into Wal-Mart. Why should Wal-Mart have to tell their customers that Best Buy has that same TV for cheaper? Ridiculous! It’s up to the consumer to shop around. Not only that, but imagine that Best Buy doesn’t have to show Wal-Mart’s prices… I rest my case. The EU needs to treat everyone equally, or not bother with this kind of legislation at all.

Link: More info and history of the subject via Computerworld