Microsoft has reached agreement with European Union anti-trust regulators to allow European users a choice of web browsers.
The accord ends 10 years of dispute between the two sides.
Over that time, the EU imposed fines totalling 1.68bn euros ($2.44bn, £1.5bn).
The European Commission said Microsoft's legally binding agreement ended the dispute and averted a possible fine for the company.
The Commission's concern was that the US computer giant may have broken competition rules by bundling its Internet Explorer web browser with its dominant Windows operating system.

I really don't see the problem with IE being included with Windows.

They could make a super simple version of IE (Like how notepad and wordpad are to microsoft office) to go with windows, but whatever

It's an issue because MS refuses to comply for years to web standards. Because of their insane powerfull position they basically controlled the internet on how websites need to be implemented.

Browser choise makes users relise that browsers which do keep standard have much less problems working with websites etc. This way MS will be forced to adapt to standards as they should, and as they do now. Hence its good MS got fined and pushed into this direction.

You know the that point about have consistent standards is fine - but I still think that the standards need to be defined partially by who has the biggest market share.

However the main point of the article from what I read, and main point of the ongoing legal case, is the whole bundling affair. On that I'm afraid that 1.6 in fines seems mad.

MS - Hey you lot want this for free?
Joe Public - Sure thats makes my life easier and I can't be arsed to find other browers and media players.
EU Polition - I don't think so - you can make things easier for people - thats going to cost you 1.6 billion - so there. Plus all of us polititions will claim additional millions in expenses in order to sort this whole sorded affair out - and we will blaim MS for that as well.
Joe Public - Cheers for that.

Tbh, because Microsoft bundled IE with their dominating Operating system, they were also dominating the browser share due to the fact that every Windows that was sold they could count it. This meant that a) all websites have to be designed around a shoddy, yes shoddy, browser and b) that other better and more effective browsers were effectively hidden from people.

Is it right that because you have monopoly in one area you should have monopoly in another?

In my opinion, no, people should have the right to choice over web browsers and the better should be chosen. If people got the choice out of all the web browsers available now straight up, most would easily pick chrome or firefox due to it being better. This would then as Saint says, make microsoft up its game and actually release something that isn't shoddy. But because IE is bundled, who is gonna bother looking up for another browser if they don't know any better.

My view of the whole thing.

site designers think they are forced to design for IE - surely its as much down to skill of the developer to right good websites? It been around long enough now - why can't it be the standard?

skill of the developer

I concede the standards point - if it doesn't work then a new standard needs to be put in. However who is responsible for creating this standard? There must be a 'HTML' body that sets the standards - surely? Afterall I'm pretty sure MS doesn't own the web, or do they?

What I cannot grasp (and the main point of the article) is how MS could be fined for giving something away free. The other issue of choosing another browser makes it even stranger as all the other browsers are free. I get how search engines make money - how on earth can MS/Firefox/Opera etc make any money from giving away something for free?

Blackhawk you are right in that I don't understand the inner workings. I'm taking the consumer view on this and from that angle it seems bonkers.