[jacquesm]

I don't think the 'simple inclusion' of a browser was what got microsoft to be shot down in the EU. The main reason was their efforts to suppress competing browsers, by software measures in their OS and by backroom dealmaking.

Those were aggravating factors and fairly big ones.

And really, all things considered, giving the users a choice is not such a big penalty. Then there is the fine of course, but I think the height of it was to some extent due to microsofts game playing with the EU courts.

[stanleydrew]

Wouldn't completely preventing an alternative browser from being installed qualify as an effort to suppress competing browsers by software measures?

And if giving the users a choice is not such a big penalty, why does Apple care so much about explicitly NOT giving users a choice?

[jacquesm]

1) yes

2) because they're jerks too.

They're just smaller jerks. When you're a de-facto monopoly the rules change, drastically in some cases.

[stanleydrew]

Very true. My only real point is that we should be allowed to demand that both companies not be jerks, and I think we let ourselves down by not expecting it.