The Judge asks:
"Why not just let personal-computer makers and consumers pick the software they want on new machines?"
OK, so MSFT offers two versions of the operating system.... With and with out the browser. The price is the same... The Manufactures (and there fore the consumers) get to choose. After making this deal with Justice, they then give the 2 products (versions really) slightly different names. An Old Coke/New Coke. Its not a big leap from what is available now, the install/setup of Windows already allows for a certain amount of choice. Lots of features are optional. Mostly to save on diskspace I suppose.
MSFT doesn't actually have to remove the browser, but just hide it, so that it is still available in its local file browsing mode, and help screen mode. The software demonstrated by Justice that is supposed to remove MSIE, is known to just remove the ICON and leaves the code and DLLs.
The Judge is making clear that if MSFT will settle for the future, he will not punish for past actions. MSFT will still be allowed to innovate. It is not that difficult to allow OEMs to pick and choose what they add (for no additional cost) to the install. Again, remember that currently, the install of Windows already allows for a certain amount of choice. MSFT could allow consumers the opportunity to download anything that is not included in their manufactures version. This, by the way, has the additional benefit of bringing control back to MSFT, as the consumer will now have a direct link to MSFT. This too is already in place at windowsupdate.microsoft.com
Choice? It is already there! Why fight? |
