The European Commission ruling that Microsoft abused its near-monopoly position in the software market could easily be shrugged off as just another legal wrangle for the US software firm, writes Jamie Smyth.
After all, Microsoft has spent more than a decade fighting legal battles with the US Department of Justice and several of its more vociferous competitors. And no matter how many judgments are lodged against the firm, Microsoft's dominance of its core market remains intact and its cash reserves continue to grow.
But, unlike previous interventions by the courts or regulators, the Commission ruling strikes at the heart of Microsoft's hugely successful business model. This model depends on "bundling" or "integrating" different software applications into its hugely popular Windows operating system.
At least 90 per cent of the world's personal computers run on Microsoft's Windows, which has become the standard for a whole generation of computer users. For most consumers, switching to an alternative is simply unthinkable, giving Microsoft a captive audience for its software products.
Microsoft insists that integrating different software, such as its audio-visual product Media Player, offers consumers a better user experience. But its competitors accuse the firm of abusing its monopoly position to damage competing software products.
Mr Monti's insistence in the Commission ruling that Microsoft provide stripped down versions of Windows without its audio visual software embedded should help firms such as RealNetworks compete more aggressively.
Crucially, Mr Monti has also set a precedent for future software releases. In short, Microsoft's competitors should benefit from a more level playing field.
The two other remedies proposed by the Commission will probably prove less important.
The proposed €497 million fine may be "unprecedented" but it will not pose a significant threat to a firm that has a cash pile of more than $50 billion on its balance sheet. And Microsoft has already given its rivals greater access to its source code to help their software work better with its operating system.
Microsoft has already stated that it would appeal the decision to the European Court of First Instance, bringing forth the prospect of another marathon legal battle.
The firm says that stripping out its audio visual software will remove other functionality from Windows, thereby degrading the user experience. It also claims that the ruling will damage its future ability to develop innovative software products.
Its appeal to the European Court could stay the Commission's decision for years, enabling Microsoft to continue to leverage its dominance of Windows operating software.
But this confrontational policy is not without its dangers for Microsoft, which faces challenges from the open source software movement at a time when its reputation has been tarnished.
