The challenges against Microsoft continue to twist and turn, even with Judge Penfield
Jackson removed from the case.
Microsoft’s newest software package, called XP, is drawing fire from several states for
returning to tactics employed by Microsoft prior to the lawsuits being filed by the U.S.
Department of Justice.
The latest world around the country is that the state attorneys general that pursued the
anti-trust case against Microsoft are now considering another lawsuit. That’s just what
the country needs now, isn’t it: more frivolous lawsuits against a private company. Sure,
it may be the largest software company, responsible for the operating systems on most of
the PC desktops in the U.S., as well as many nations around the globe, but it is still a
private company. Aside from that, the company is doing what businesses in America do all
the time: meeting the needs of the customer. Sure, this could be a sticking point with a
lot of software released by the company who’s slogan could be “We will release all
software before it’s bug-free,” but look at the needs being met.
Are you one of the Microsoft bashers? If so, let me ask you a few questions. What
operating system did you use prior to Windows? MS-DOS? Unix? Did you, by chance, happen to
own, nay, use a PC-based computer before the introduction of Microsoft Windows? If not,
then what background or experiences do you have for comparison in your arguments against
the software manufacturer?
My experience with computers goes back to the pre-historic dinosaur days of the TRS-80 and
the Commodore VIC-20 and Commodore 64. I’ve worked in DOS, Unix, C, Macintosh, and the
many flavors of MS Windows, except for Windows 2000 and Windows ME. I’ve used most of
Microsoft’s products on both the PC and the Mac platforms, as well as many competing
products. Why? Well, to test the products out fully, looking for the products that best
meet my needs, or the needs of the computer I worked for at the time. In most cases, the
Microsoft product came out ahead, but not because I preferred the MS product to any other
product. In fact, I was a staunch supporter of Netscape until Microsoft Internet Explorer
4.0 came out. At that point, Netscape lost its advantage in the browser market because it
became the slower of the two major browsers available. Sure, there was Mosaic, but that
had many limitations.
The noise from the sabers being rattled by Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal
and Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller is being annoying. The pair of public servants say
they are concerned about the software company’s plans to include several new features in
the new operation system being released this fall, dubbed, Windows XP. They also have
serious reservations about Microsoft’s plans to offer Web-based subscription services,
possibly paving the way for pay-as-you-use software that never is installed on your
computer.
Miller, who rattled his saber loud enough to gather 19 other attorneys general to side
with him, said, "Microsoft seems to be using much of its power to preclude competition on
a new platform. This is what they did before and this is what they're doing again to
maintain their monopoly."
Blumenthal has said some of the states are discussing possibly filing a second lawsuit.
That is one of several options presently being discussed, he said.
"We haven't reached a point where we're discussing it publicly," Blumenthal said, “but we
have been exploring strategies, consulting experts, doing legal research, generally
preparing."
Using Miller’s logic, I ask you this: What features have been added to the new model car
that replaced last year’s car? Was a CD player included as standard equipment? How about
side-impact airbags? Were tinted windows included in the package? How about tilt steering?
Or how about on-board GPS? This is the equivalent of what Microsoft does with software. To
better meet the needs of consumers and businesses, Microsoft accepts “dream lists” from
consumers with ideas for product development and incorporates those ideas, as appropriate,
into new versions of its software. Is that bad?
You see, the bad part of Microsoft’s implementation is not that it adds new features;
rather that Microsoft is the big cheese in the software world. Note that Microsoft isn’t
the only kid on the block. The company’s chief rival is Linux, one flavor of Unix. Most
folks would never use computers if they had to wade through the user guides for Unix, let
alone learn the commands. The states are just angry because Microsoft is innovative.
"We have no current plans for a second lawsuit," they said, adding "the company's
announcements about XP and Hailstorm indicate to many of us that Microsoft may be
repeating its efforts to maintain and extend its monopoly much more broadly into the
Internet."
Another option being eyed, according to both Miller and Blumenthal, is to bring up
concerns about the new products as part of the current case.
While the states rattle sabers, Microsoft sits back, waiting, almost like the lion in the
den. Microsoft officials have said any talk of additional litigation is premature, as no
one, not even company insiders, who what the final products being cited by critics will
look like or include. The problem with all the criticism, you see, is that XP isn’t
finished being designed as yet.
One group opposed to Microsoft is lobbying for a second lawsuit. The group, called
ProComp, a catchy term for the group’s long name, “Project to Promotion Competition and
Innovation in the Digital Age,” includes companies such as Oracle, Sun Microsystems, and
Netscape, a subsidiary of AOL-Time-Warner. ProComp director Mike Pettit wrote a 59-page
paper criticizing Microsoft's practices.
On the ProComp website, Pettit writes, “Today, distribution of the personal computer
software is substantially controlled by a single dominant company that controls more than
90 percent of the personal computer operating system market and over 85 percent of word
processing, spreadsheet, and presentation software markets. This overwhelming
concentration of market power is already inhibiting consumers' access to the most
innovative goods and services possible. That dominance must not be extended to the
Internet or other areas of digital commerce.” My simple question to him is, “Why do you
think 90 percent of the PC operating system market and over 85 percent of word processing,
spreadsheet, and presentation software markets are dominated by one company?”
Pettit goes on to say, “Computer manufacturers and users must have the freedom to install
whatever software they wish on the computers they make and use, and to select the images
of their choice for the computer's opening screen.” Pettit must be technologically
impaired. If you want a different OS, go out any buy Red Hat. If you want a different word
processor, go buy Word Perfect. Give me a break! Does anyone in government have any idea
how simple it is to change the operating system or software on modern computers? It
doesn’t take a genius or a geek, honest.
Blumenthal said ProComp’s concern that Microsoft may try to extend its market dominance is
valid.
"They certainly raise the prospect, if not the probability of the same dangers and
potential harms that resulted from past practices that were proved at trial," Blumenthal
said.
With this reasoning, no one should be allowed to purchase alcohol because it could
“certainly raise the prospect, if not the probability of the same dangers and potential
harms that resulted from past practices that were proved” prior to prohibition or a drunk
driving case or a coroner’s inquest into an alcohol-intoxication death.
Negotiations between Microsoft and AOL ceased in recent weeks on how to place AOL's
software on Windows XP. This end in negotiations leaves open the possibility that AOL
might sue its rival. What about the attorneys general considering an anti-trust suit
against AOL for being a monopoly? AOL is the largest “content provider” in the United
States, and quite possibly the world. If that isn’t a monopoly, you tell me what is.
One reason that’s made its way into public about the reasoning behind the breakdown in
negotiations is that AOL would not preclude legal action. "There's no way we were going to
include them in Windows XP if they were going to sue us over Windows XP," one Microsoft
official has been quoted as saying. And why should MS include AOL with that kind of
threat? If someone bullies me, do you think I would back down? Well, for those of you who
don’t know me personally, let rest your weary thoughts: No, I do not back down.
AOL’s vice president, John Buckley, said his monopoly didn't want to delineate its right
to sue Microsoft. He added that even with that disclaimer, it doesn’t mean AOL intends to
sue Microsoft. Yeah, right, and you don’t want MSN’s share of the ISP market either, do
you John?
|
"States Becoming Software Dictators?"
