Microsoft's argument was essentially that IE was a part of Windows and it
couldn't be anticompetitive to distribute part of Windows with Windows. And when
it was shown that you could indeed remove IE from Windows, they physically moved
the code for IE into unrelated system libraries so that you couldn't remove IE
without removing critical system libraries or physically picking those libraries
apart and reassembling them (which you weren't allowed to do).
An
analogous situation would be claiming that a radio isn't a separate component,
it's an integral part of the car. And then, when faced with someone
demonstrating that you can unplug a couple of cables, undo a couple screws and
slide the radio out and replace it with a third-party radio with no ill effects
on the car, taking the radio's tuner and building it into the engine control
computer and building the radio volume control into the ABS control module. Sure
you've made it so you can't remove the radio without crippling the car, but you
made it that way. The situation has nothing to do with any inherent need
for it to be that way for the radio or the car to work properly. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
| 
