However, it's not as if no one saw such a penalty coming.
Microsoft warned stockholders in its latest 10-Q filing last month that it expected the EC's competition directorate to force it to bundle rivals' browsers into Windows.
Microsoft's 10-Q warns stockholders that the fine in the latest case could be "significant."
The likelihood that the EC will come down on the plaintiff's side in this latest case against Microsoft grew last spring when Kroes gave a speech to a European open source group in which she complained that antitrust sanctions had not been effective in remedying a certain, unnamed company's dominance. Other statements she made, at the time, however, made it very clear she was referring to Microsoft.
In its earlier case, the EC forced Microsoft to ship a version of Windows in Europe that lacked a media player — a move that regulators believed would enable consumers to easily install one of their own choosing. Microsoft was also allowed to continue selling the original Windows version that included Windows Media Player.
Yet regulators' efforts to encourage consumers to consider rival media players hit a snag, according to one source close to the proceedings. The source said consumers saw no need to buy the edition that lacked Windows Media Player, since it cost the same as the other version.
Now, however, the EC is not planning on making the same mistake twice, the source told InternetNews.com.
Since it sees the approach it took with Windows Media Player as proven fairly ineffective, the EC could enforce a so-called "must carry" stipulation, forcing Microsoft to include competitors' browsers with Windows.
However, the EC would likely find it more palatable to require Microsoft to present consumers with a "ballot screen" when they first start up a new computer, the source said. That screen would let the user choose which browser should be the default.
Earlier statements from Todd, Kroes' spokesman, would seem to agree.
"Microsoft will be obliged to design Windows in a way that allows users to choose which competing Web browser(s) instead of, or in addition to, Internet Explorer, they want to install and which one they want to have as default," Todd told EurActiv.
Déjà Vu All Over Again
This latest case began a little more than a year ago, when Norwegian browser vendor Opera complained to the EC about Microsoft's IE policies.
At that time, Microsoft was already smarting over the loss of its appeal in its earlier European antitrust case. An EU court had upheld findings that the company had illegally used its market dominance to keep competitors out of important European markets, including the media player segment.
Given the earlier loss, Microsoft is not likely to pursue appeals unless the penalties are extreme, the source told InternetNews.com.
"If the Commission decided on something really onerous, Microsoft might appeal," the source said. "But there's not much stomach for it."
Google Joins In
The EC's not the only one gunning for the world's largest software company.
Search leader Google announced Tuesday that it has asked to join in the EC's case as an interested third party, just as Mozilla, prime mover behind the Firefox Web browser, did earlier in February.
"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," Sundar Pichai, Google's vice president of product management, wrote in the blog post.
Google also has a direct stake in the Web browser space, however.
In September, it launched Chrome, which still remains in heavy development.
Since its inception, Chrome has served as a test bed for new browser technologies, such as security models, Web standards support, and transfer protocols that the company said it hadn't wanted to attempt in connection with other, established open source efforts, like Firefox.
