You install Windows, and then download and install the browser of your choice. Which probably is the most healthy, fair and unmanipulative solution anyway.
Microsoft was wrong when claiming that Explorer was integral part of Windows that could not be extracted and kept separate. Obviously they can extract it.
It was a decision to make that argument in an attempt to establish Explorer in a dominant market position. But that argument never had any substance. It was aiming to make benefit from psychologic effects: that people would not care for other browsers if Windows comes with a browser already.
Letum, you do not know the market functionality if you find it okay to expect one competitor to actively distribute and spread those products of his direct rivals that are in direct competition to his own products, nd to do so without compoensation and to his own disadvantage.
Rivals shall not use unfair cheats to limit market access for other competitors. But they also must not actively assist the other to distribute his own stuff. Demanding that makes mockery of markets' functionality.
Preventing Microsoft to manipulate market access for compoetitors and abusing its monopole, is one thing, and the EU was right to break that. Monopoloes should not be allowed, never. Demanding Microsoft to actively assist competitors to bring their stuff amongst people, is something very different - and here the EU stepped over the line, and now is riding on a moral crusade - and towards the direction of state-governed enterprise.
You could as well demand Mercedes to sell Toyotas in their own shops.