Without even considering the merits of Microsoft's arguments (which were addressed), I have to agree with the EU on the issue of Microsoft's request for more delay. MS is a wealthy firm, quite capable of hiring some lawyers (obviously capable of hiring dozens or hundreds, if necessary) to work with the EU to understand their requirements and try to reach some kind of acceptable agreement. They had 60 days to do so. Even if we leave out the traditional "week when nothing happens", Microsoft had plenty of time to work with the Commission in good faith.------- <p> -------But instead, it seems that Microsoft chose to disrespect the Court and instead "sprung" an announcement of Source Code licensing in the media, just barely before the end of the extension period. (And Microsoft has had LOTS of time since the 2004 initial decision to attempt negotiation.)------- <p> ------- Perhaps MS chose to behave as SCO did a couple of weeks ago ("springing" invalid Deposition requests for the moon and stars on Oracle, Intel, and The Open Group), with the idea of forcing an additional delay by making their proposal for remedy so shortly before the end of the extension. If so, I think it was a bad strategy... after the Judge Jackson versus District Court fiasco, no Judge or Judiciary Commission will let his/her/their feelings endanger their rulings again.------- <p> ------- But maybe, there's simply no room for compromise: Microsoft won't agree to ANY remedy which is acceptable to the Commission, and angering them with more delay-games won't make matters worse for MS. In this case, any gambit to delay the fines might be attractive.