I know the point you're trying to make, I just think it's a load of shit. For many reasons, the foremost of which being that software is a different beast than other normal products for which one could validly consider bundling to be an antitrust action. The bottom line of an OS is that you NEED a browser in order to get online to get your choice of browser. Simply not bundling a browser is not the answer, because 50% of the populace is too dumb, or somehow not easily able, to get a browser loaded onto their system on their own. And it creates a ridiculous overhead too. You think the Mozilla Foundation can afford to print and send CDs all over the globe? Or are you just going to trust the guy at the Quik-E-Mart who burned you a copy of Firefox when he says he didn't put a trojan in there?
Yes, IE may suck, but a new computer needs a starting point, and IE is it. And as long as MS doesn't do something to stop you from loading any browser of your choice, there's really no reason to bitch.
And if you want Firefox/Safari/every other browser in existance loaded on to Windows, does that mean you're in favour of the same thing being done to *nix? I wonder how big those distro downloads will be with 50 browsers preloaded. And I wonder how confused all the noobs and old folks will be when they go to open the internet and there's 50 different icons there staring at them, and every one behaves differently.
Forced browser bundling is a retarded idea. Everyone has choice now, and that's what counts.