I choose to use Opera as my default browser, nothing stops me from that (and I never said anyone does).

Like when I choose to use it for Amazon.com’s “Look inside” feature, but then it tells me that *my browser* *doesn’t support* that feature. Then I choose to use my right to do countermeasures against my discrimination. In this case, I just set Opera to completely lie to Amazon.com’s server, telling them that it’s Firefox, and voila! my browser now *supports* that feature. I choose to put up with the violation of my right of not having to do extra measures to get the same things that users of certain other, equally capable browsers get by default. I do it because I feel “at home” in Opera browser, much more than in other browsers.

I choose to use it on every site, but some sites discriminate me, telling me that *my browser* *does not support* this or that. With forged browser identification, many of these sites work, but some still don’t.

Sometimes I have to use my right to use another browser for a particular site, because I am stripped of my right to use it with Opera browser, despite the latter one is technically fully capable of being compatible with the requirements of that particular site. In these cases, I use my right to be frustrated, or angry, or resigned, or anything else, over my unjustified discrimination.

Some employees of Opera Software use their rights to work as site compatibility specialists, writing so-called “site-patches” so that standards-deviant sites get to work with the standards-compliant Opera browser.

Opera Software chooses to use its rigth to spend extra money to develop generic and site-specific countermeasures against discrimination against its product.

If the web was all based on well-defined standards, and those standards were correctly followed, these things would never happen! Like, with television standards, it does not matter what brand tv you use, as long an it supports the required standards, you will get the same content that everyone else get.

But instead of that, the legacy of deliberately Netscape-killer Microsoft is that the deliberately standards-deviant IE gets to be the number one target of web development, and extra efforts are made (which means extra money spent) by every developers to make their sites compatible with IE’s quirks and deviations. Then there comes the checking of web statistics, to help decide what other individual browsers should they develop specifically for. Firefox, Safari, iPhone browser are the usual suspects.

Can you imagine every TV station having to adapt its airing equipment to different brand TV sets? Isn’t this idea ridiculous?

Isn’t the need to develop for IE and for this and that browser, instead of having to develop for *the web*, also ridiculous?

Given how your agenda here is to deny it, I don’t think anyone expected you to confess either. It’s really a riot that someone who labels others as “ignorant” claims that Microsoft somehow has “control” over the web when upstarts like Firefox have risen from nothing to claim one-third of the browser market. Seriously, aside from yourself, who are you trying to fool here?

When the only real competition comes from a not for profit open source organization that depends on volunteers for almost half of its work product and nearly all of its marketing and distribution, while more than half a dozen other “traditional” browser vendors with better than I.E. products have had near-zero success encroaching on Microsoft I.E.’s dominance, there’s a demonstrable tilt to the playing field. That tilt comes with the distribution channel – default status for the OS bundled Web browser.

IE is better than previous versions because they knew that the government was breathing down their necks.

Removing incompatibilities means more jobs because the web will work better for everyone.

And about compatibility it is much better then in previous version anyway (transparent pngs are finally supported), with IE conditional expressions its not that hard to prepare browser compatible site. Besides those little incompatibilities between browsers give jobs. Removing incompatibilities means less jobs. Thats bad, and its against EU Charter of Fundamental Rights!!

If you can show that Google has abused its monopoly, go right ahead and do that. Until you can, you may want to quit it with the silly and pointless analogies, LOL.

If you are against all government intervention I guess you are opposed to safety regulations for building and stuff like that?