It is expected that the EU will announce this week a fine of $613 million to Microsoft for anti-competitive practices.

This article on The Washington Post said:  Feverish negotiations over two weeks yielded a plan to settle charges that the company used the power of its Windows monopoly to favor its media player over those made by rivals, the executive said. But as the details were being worked out, a Microsoft negotiating team at European Union headquarters in Brussels that included chief executive Steve Ballmer was told that something had to be done to restrict future bundling of other programs into Windows.  It then goes on to say:   According to the Microsoft executive, an agreement was fashioned that would have required computer makers around the world who licensed Windows to install at least three rival media players on the hard drives of new machines.

As someone who is generally uninstalling third-party software from Windows as soon as I'm done setting up a new computer, this would really annoy me.  But it also brings to light another question - what is the core difference between Microsoft bundline Media Player in Windows and Apple bundling the iLife programs into the Mac?  Some might think that having Media Player included with Windows hurts the chances of a product like Real Player (I don't, by the way, as only Real Player can play .ra files, so you'd still have to install it for those - it's key file format - regardless of having Media Player.  And I've never been a fan of the format.), but doesn't iTunes included on the Mac hurt the chances of companies like the new Napster?  Or iCal hurt calendaring companies?  Or those other whiz-bang little iLife apps hurt third-party companies who made the same for the Mac before?

A number of you readers are Mac people...any insight would be appreciated.