European Court : M$ to pay big euros.

Perhaps the most disturbing thing for Microsoft is not that the European commission fined it just under 500 million europs, but that by reason of delay in payment due to appeals, currency movements against the dollar means that the cost of settling the fine has gone up by more than 10% in USD terms since it was made.

But Microsoft got of lightly on costs, being ordered to pay only 80% of the European Commission's costs of appeal.

Basically, the orders arise out of Microsoft's dominant position in relation to operating systems and office suites. For example, most users of MS Office cannot open documents produced in OpenOffice.Org format, rendering those not using MS Office more difficult to deal with. And the new MS Document Imaging Format included with current versions of MS Office are not readable by most non MS programs. Users of the system are generally unhappy when they are told to send documents in a more widely available format such as pdf, which, incidentally, OpenOffice handles as a standard tool.

But it is in the operating system, and particularly in relation to the bundled software, that MS has really proved unpopular in Europe. Its tendency to incorporate its own or bought in versions of products such as Internet Explorer means that many users don't even look outside the box to see what else is on the market. MS basically locks them in, and then sells them more stuff.

But the EU said that this was prejudicial to competitors and that users must be able to choose what components they install and to elect to get alternatives if they wish - and that MS must not put technical or other roadblocks in the way of competitors being able to integrate their products with those of MS.

Microsoft argued that the appointment of an independent trustee to make sure it behaves itself was excessive. Shame: one man springs to mind as ideally suited to the task: Hans Blick. And if you've forgotten him already, you should be ashamed of yourself. He was the one who said there were no WMD in Iraq when the US and the UK insisted that there were. We can't think of anyone who would be better able to work out the truth over what is and is not in Windows.

The Microsoft case might prove to have very wide implications. If software bundling is a problem, then what is the position in relation e.g. satnav in cars? Should manufacturers be able to fit their own, or should they have to buy in independently developed new product? What about Ford's own brand radios in cars? Are purchasers to be offered a free choice of the tyres fitted to their new cars?

Much as we laud the decision to curtail Microsoft's dominance, we also wonder how the end game will pan out.