Last week Microsoft proposed changes to its EU browser ballot screen that would see Apple's Safari browser listed first followed by, Chrome, Internet Explorer, Firefox and Opera getting the short stick and listed last.

Previously Microsoft had proposed to the European Commission that the browsers' be listed in order of market share, which would mean Internet Explorer being listed first, followed by Firefox. However, that proposal was turned down by the EU as they said it's antitrust action against Microsoft was started as a result of competition being squeezed out of the market and not being given a fair enough representation because IE was being bundled with Windows. Listing IE first the Commission argued would only give it a biased advantage, in the eyes of most users.

As a result of this Microsoft went back, thought about it and decided it would list the browsers in alphabetical order of the companies that make each browser. This would mean that Apple's Safari browser would be listed first, followed by Google Chrome, Microsoft's Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox and still in last position Opera. 

Microsoft's updated browser ballot screen - Click the image to see it enlarged

Without this situation becoming even more ridiculous than it already is, you can't ask fairer than that and the European Commission welcomed the proposal and Microsoft went home as happy as it could, given the circumstances of the situation.

Today though it has emerged that a Mozilla employee is not happy with their positioning on the ballot screen and propose that Microsoft go back to the EU with a change that would see their Firefox browser listed first on the screen; oh the irony.

What's even more shocking is that the employee says on her blog that the ballot screen should list the browsers' in order of market share, with the exception of IE. As a result of Microsoft possibly being listed last on a ballot screen which is meant to list the browsers in terms of market share, Firefox would be promoted to first place. Jenny Boriss, who is a Firefox user experience designer argued in her blog post that the current proposal is "the worst option possible".

She went on to say, "Microsoft wrote in their proposal that 'nothing in the design and implementation of the Ballot Screen and the presentation of competing web browsers will express a bias for a Microsoft web browser or any other web browser,' but this is exactly what the current design does. Windows users presented with the current design will tend to make only two choices: IE because they are familiar with it, or Safari because it is the first item".

She stated on her blog that placing Safari first on the screen would give it a distinct advantage as people in western countries read and scan from right to left. Studies have shown she argued that items placed first on a ballot typically end up being selected more than those not listed in first place.

Another proposal Boriss suggested is to randomize the order in which the ballot screen presents the browsers' to the user, so each person will see a different browser order on their screen. The problem with this though is that one of the browsers' is still going to be listed first and by her own argument people will tend to choose the first option.

One other proposal, is for everyone to grow up and accept that somebody has to be first as its a law of physics or to place each browser in a circle arrangement, that way no one is first and no one is last. They could take it a step further and have the browser logos spinning around so fast when the screen loads that none of the browsers' can be distinguished. The wheel could then slow down enough for the user to select a browser.

My other idea is that they could just tell Microsoft to make a screen with a big red button saying 'surprise me', and Windows in an unbiased fashion chooses whichever browser it decides upon. The user then has an anxious wait to see if they get the browser they really wanted or the lame duck that they would never choose. It could become a best seller.

This whole situation arose in December 2007 when Opera went to the EU, complaining about Microsoft bundling Internet Explorer with their market dominating Windows Operating System. The EU investigated and eventually charged Microsoft for violating it's antitrust laws in January 2009.

Microsoft made several proposals to sort the issue out, one of which involved Windows 7 being shipped without Internet Explorer, but they later proposed a ballot screen which was accepted by the EU in July. However since the idea of this ballot screen emerged, it has caused a lot of controversy over the ordering of the browsers' as each company wants fair representation.

Fair representation may not be that easy, given that every man and is dog knows the IE icon and brand name. Why would those that aren't tech savey choose anything else?

Source: computerworld.com via neowin.net