Instead, Microsoft has agreed to give customers a choice of up to eleven competitive browsers, including Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and Opera. OEMs will also be able to choose other browsers to install on their Windows PCs before shipping.

European consumers who already have Windows operating systems will be sent a software update by mid-March that will allow them to easily switch browsers. Going forward until 2015, new Windows buyers will be presented with the choice automatically. Since PC owners ostensibly have access to IE alternatives already anyway, all Microsoft is being forced to do is essentially to remind them of their options. It seems like a fair enough system, which makes it even more surprising that it took billions of dollars of fines to get here. [NY Times]

It was decided that Microsoft's "Hey! We'll just leave all browsers out completely!" would result in headaches for some consumers who would struggle to download any browser without being able to use Internet Explorer to do so. The new approach is to sell Windows PCs with Internet Explorer as the default browser, but to present users with a "ballot screen" which allows them to select and "easily install competing browsers from the Web." That's not all though:

In addition, (computer makers) would be able to install competing Web browsers, set those as default and disable Internet Explorer should they so wish. The Commission welcomes this proposal, and will now investigate its practical effectiveness in terms of ensuring genuine consumer choice.

There's a catch of sorts in that there aren't any specifics on how competing browsers will be selected for the "ballot", so the jury's still out on just how accommodating Microsoft is really being. [CNET]

Indeed, Microsoft has stated before that it would be impossible to remove the browser from Windows 7, due to the fact that "the browser is closely connected with the operating system." However, thanks to EU pressure and a multi-billion dollar fine hanging over its head, Microsoft has miraculously discovered a way to make it so.

As a refresher, the EU demanded that MS remove IE (or include competitor's browsers) in Windows because of its dominant 90% market penetration across the continent. According to an article at Swedish news site e24, the EU has also proposed that Microsoft include competitor's browsers, including those from Opera, Mozilla and Google, as part of a settlement. [e24 (Swedish) - Thanks, Andreas]

Aside from the large EU flag flying on its front page, AMD also includes an extensive amount of information on the ruling with a page entitled "Break Free." That page includes anti-Intel sentiment from various respectable news organizations. All we can say to that is, where's the love? Here, AMD, I've got a quote all packaged up for you from our own John Herrman:

Ok, that [Intel's suspected antitrust violation] does sound pretty bad.

Bam! [via CNET]

The service, called "Passport", will be available as a three-month summer trial for UK subscribers, and can be activated for free. Customers will be able to travel to just about any country that Vodafone operates in and tap into the minute and text allocations from their regular plan, or in the case of pay-as-you-go customers, call and text at their usual domestic rate. Data roaming still applies, but come July it'll be capped at about $1.40 per megabyte as per new EU regulations.

As someone who's stuck in concurrent T-Mobile contracts in two separate countries, I take this news kind of personally. Steep roaming charges make some sense when you're jumping between carriers, but they're stupidly frustrating when you're paying way more for services from a different arm of the same company.

This obviously doesn't mean much for Americans (although Voda does own a 45% stake in Verizon), but it does represent a precedent we should all push for. Aside from steep taxes (as in the UK), it's mainly plain old price gouging—of carriers by other carriers, or of customers by their carriers—that keeps prices so high. [Telegraph]

EU competition commissioner Neelie Kroes said Intel had pursued a strategy aimed mainly at excluding A.M.D. by paying computer makers and retailers to postpone, cancel or avoid A.M.D. products entirely.

Ok, that does sound pretty bad. [NYT—Thanks, Mikael!]

Like most areas, the vast majority of bulbs sold are frosted because of the unsightly glare coming from an exposed filament. By banning these bulbs, the EU can effectively force people to adopt more energy efficient bulbs like CFLs. This thin, heat-resistant silicone cover can be placed over a transparent bulb to transform it from clear to frosted.

I am all about adopting more energy efficient lighting, but a rule like this is probably a bit premature. CFLs often take a while to warm up, they can be a bit bulky and the light quality can sometimes be unappealing. These problems will be ironed out over time, but people shouldn't have to put condoms over bulbs while they wait for CFLs and LEDs to better meet their needs. [Ingo Mauer via Designboom]

The Pirate Party, staffed entirely by volunteers, may have only gotten about 35,000 votes (0.63%) in Sweden's 2006 elections, but with the current uproar over the Swedish goverment's restrictive laws and the media sensation of our torrenting buddies the Pirate Bay, registration has swelled. With 12,000 contributing members, the Pirate Party is now larger than both the Swedish Green Party and the Swedish Left Party, and they're staking the future of their organization on a run for a seat in the European Union Parliament this June.

The Pirate Party doesn't have a lock on a seat; they'll need about 100,000 votes, which would require a huge jump from their previous total. But given the atmosphere, they've certainly got a shot at it. Check out their website for more information on their aims, which include not only copyright law but Internet privacy as well. [Wired]

According to Google's Sundar Pichai, vice president for product management:

Google believes that the browser market is still largely uncompetitive, which holds back innovation for users. This is because Internet Explorer is tied to Microsoft's dominant computer operating system, giving it an unfair advantage over other browsers.

I bet the Firefox and Apple browser teams, currently with 21.5 and 8.3 percent of the market, don't give this a lot of thinking. Does Google-with only 1 percent of the market-think that Microsoft should not include Internet Explorer in their operating system? Maybe they want them to include Chrome as well? Should Google include MSN Search and Yahoo in their Android cellphones too? [NYT-illustration by EricWdesigns]

The main driving force behind the Commission's campaign is the reduction of e-waste, which is sensible. After all, a proprietary charger generally dies with its chargee, which seems like a waste. Surprisingly, cellphone manufacturers appear to be relatively eager to comply. The GSM Association announced today that 17 manufacturers, including Nokia, Motorola and Samsung have agreed on miniMicro-USB as the standard—following a (to date hollow) precedent set by others nearly two years ago.

Micro-USB in cellphones as been trending up anyway, and seems like a sensible choice. Accordingly, it's not really surprising to see companies like Samsung and Motorola agree to a standard that they already sometimes use, or for others to switch to a standard that, while it cuts lucrative charger sales, makes things simpler and cheaper in the long run. The real challenge for the commission will be to convince companies like Apple to join in—not they they'll necessarily have a choice. UPDATE: AFP says the standard in mini USB, but the GSMA press release confirms that it's micro-usb. [AFP]

If Apple doesn't respond to the allegations by Nov. 3, Norway will take Apple before its very diplomatic and wussy-sounding Market Council as the first test case to force Apple to bust open FairPlay. If Norway is for seriously taking on Apple, iTunes-loving Norwegians better enjoy its full DRM'd bounty while they can, especially if any ruling about FairPlay extends to movies and TV shows—guess what's slathered all over them? Why?

Likelier actions from Apple than handing over the FairPlay keys: shutting down the iTunes Store in Norway, pulling everything with DRM, or a blitzkrieg into Oslo. [Yahoo! via Ars Technica]

It also talks about lofty goals like making his for "individuals around the world, designed to help them stay connected...and protected." We read this as forcing people to onto an online system so lousily managed that, according to their own employees, Microsoft has to go and buy Yahoo in order to fix it. [ZDNet]

Commission will verify whether Microsoft is complying with EU antitrust rules, whether the principles announced today would end any infringement were they implemented in practice, and whether or not the principles announced today are in fact implemented in practice."

"Microsoft is saying it will give access to open APIs, however, but there are terms...It's the same old story. Patent protection applies, and people can use the APIs commercially as long as they pay Microsoft a royalty. They are trying to enclose open commons by trying to apply their business model, which is all about owning technology, to open source."

According to the deal's terms, developers can pay a one-time fee of 10,000 euros ($14,300) to get ahold of Microsoft's server protocols. If they're used in a rival's product, Microsoft's entitled to 0.4 percent of sales—Microsoft wanted 5.95 percent, so they've taken quite a pay cut, indicating that Microsoft's hands were pretty tied up on the matter. After their success in browbeating Microsoft here, it's anyone's guess as to where the EU's antitrust police will point their legal guns next. What do you guys think of the ruling? Should Microsoft have to relinquish code to the competition? [NYT, Flickr]

For its part, Apple's saying that they too, wants identical pricing across the continent from the very bottom of its heart, but those damn record labels won't let them. Where have we heard that before?

To cut them some slack though, as Ars does, dealing with legal labyrinths that cut across national borders undoubtedly causes quite the headache, and practically it would probably be easier for Apple to just offer one store for everyone, regardless of location, simply slightly localized. So we'll take Apple at their word, for now. – Matt Buchanan

EU investigating Apple, Big Four labels over country-specific pricing [Ars Technica]

Jobs makes it obvious at the end that the letter was penned to head off mounting pressure from several countries in Europe, in particular Norway, to drop its FairPlay system and make iTunes tracks and the iPod interoperable with other players and services, respectively, or risk legal action. But what does the letter do besides that?

Most realistically, it was just a PR move designed to defuse and shift criticism to the record companies while making Jobs (and Apple) look fantastic—all while things stay the same. After all, the odds of the record companies dropping DRM is nil, and he knows it. But look at what he says about the current path: In the "current state of affairs in the industry, [the] customers are being well served with a continuing stream of innovative products and a wide variety of choices." Not exactly a vote of no confidence.

Jobs pretends that he thinks the only reason record companies want DRM is because they have an unfounded fear of piracy. But he knows better. The numbers he throws out—20 billion CD tracks to 2 billion iTunes tracks—show he does. DRM is designed to uphold the CD industry, where record companies control all of the cards and the profits. DRM makes digital music supplemental to, not a replacement of, the CD industry. So that means Steve really is fighting for us, right?

With iTunes, Jobs takes some of that control—as well as some of the profit. And this is when digital distribution is playing a far-second fiddle to CDs. We saw this control come into play when he manhandled the industry to keep tracks at 99 cents a pop—part of that manhandling came in the form of public sound bytes slamming the labels for being greedy.

It's possible he's trying to win the DRM argument (if he genuinely is) the same way: by proclaiming himself willing to help consumers, if only they'd pull him down off of the cross he's nailed to by DRM. Dropping FairPlay would be a minor loss for Apple, whose major source of profits is the iPod, not iTunes. As Jobs said, most of the music on iPods comes from other sources. And even if the tracks aren't wrapped up in DRM, who's to say Apple's going to unchain the iPod from the iTunes program altogether? If iTunes is selling the exact same non-DRM music another store is selling, why go to the other one when you have a perfectly good one integrated with your jukebox/iPod manager? If anything, this would solidify both the iPod and iTunes at the top because there's no need to buy CDs anymore to get DRM-free music.

Finally, as Cult of Mac points out, Jobs says nothing about DRM for video. He can't if he wants to distribute movies from anyone but Paramount or Disney. And the iPhone? A closed system. Apple's not opening anything up anytime soon. It was nice hearing the words from the man himself, but we know DRM is here to stay.

But for all the assumptions we're making, It is also completely possible that Steve is just sick and tired of the music industry, and wants to get his words out on the issue.– Matt Buchanan

iTunes [Gizmodo]