Just thought I'd share a gripe of mine. I usually use Firefox for web-browsing (I know someone is going to suggest Google Chrome, but for now it has one too many rendering issues) but on the occasion I do fire IE8, especially if using a Microsoft site as they still don't quite seem to have got the W3C model of the web.

On to the point - I needed to download a file using IE, and this is where Microsoft's clueless-ness as to browser design really shows up. The Download File box has not changed one bit since IE6 (okay it has a new animation) yet somehow they found time to implement a load of (generally unused) Accelerators?

For a product that was supposed to bring IE back in line with the other browsers it's a huge failure. I would guess most users download a file or two quite frequently, how many use Accelerators.

But another problem with Microsoft's whole web strategy in general is that they still seem to think they can treat it like OS - releasing one every year or two rather than going for more incremental upgrades like other browser manufacturers.

The (lack) of effort that went in to IE8 is reflected in how it changed market share - Firefox still continues gain share unabated.

But it got me thinking into how IE8 (and 7) came into being - the Department of Justice suing Microsoft for abuse of their monopoly.

It's worth pausing for a second and thinking about what this actually meant. Small companies can generally do what they want and bundle what they like (Apple gets away with it because their sales just aren't good enough). But if you, the consumer, buy that product and enough others do, suddenly you game some control over how that company may operate.

Now it might be just me, but I think that however much I liked Windows or how many copies I bought, it's still Microsoft's product. They made it, I chose to buy it. Just because I liked one version, why should I get to dictate how the next version should be.

Regardless of the slight idiocies of monopoly law (only large companies may do no evil - why not just stop everyone?) it brought me back to IE6 and Windows 98 SE. Aah the days of restarting every 12 hours just to keep the system stable.

One thing it did have though was an integration of web-browser and file browser. You could open Explorer and type a URL in the bar and it would go straight to it. Now this didn't mean a whole lot back then, but these days it would be fantastic to be able to have folder views and internet pages in the same tabbed application; especially with on-line storage systems growing ever more popular.

Essentially the DoJ ruling was quite flawed (it's relatively obvious they didn't have the greatest grasp of tech) - the problem was the way Microsoft was implementing the IE and Windows integration, not the fact it was doing it. What Microsoft should have done is to ensure any browser manufacturer could build a browser that integrated properly with Windows. Instead MS competitors pushed the idea that a browser must be a standalone app and not integrated with the rest of the OS functions, something which has held back exciting innovations in browser and OS technology for normal users.

Of course now Google is going to do exactly that with the Google Chrome browser and OS. Just remember, you have the DoJ to thank that we didn't get something similar years ago.