Remember now, her threshold determination is whether or not the states, as individual objectors, have a case on their own, independent of the DOJ.
She has never tipped her hand as to how she would decide this issue.
BUT, if she would have ruled against the states' rights to bring a separate anti trust action under fed law, we would have heard by now.
But even so, that would still leave the issue of whether the doj settlement is fair and comprehensive.
_I_ think, and I think Microsoft thinks, that she has ruled in the states favor, regarding their right to sue, but is inclined to believe that the doj settlement is the appropriate remedy.
_I_ think that is why MS has declared Linux to be "just their biggest threat that ever was, ever", and yet are really not doing anything against Linux. Of course having Linux as the big enemy has other benefits to MS, also.
IF this is the case, the longer she waits, the more just the DOJ remedy becomes by mere passage of time. That, I believe is why, MS has started complying with that order. IF that is the case, then the longer she waits, the more information she has that she has come to the right conclusion. And when her order does come, it will be then the broadest possible, States: You DO have the right, but not this time, sort of thing..
On the other hand, the longer she waits, the better off MS is.
_I_ believe that all the secret code in the Windows O/S will eventually become an open and documented developers app for the "New Dot Net Operating System", IIs.
I know of the client's burning desire for an answer, but usually, the longer you can wait for the "truth", the more uncertaintly you can put up with, the better it really is, no matter how much you think the market certainty would help.
And the beat goes on.
Caution, I have not bothered to review the documents before firing this off at the lip.
O. Duke Url, III, esq. |
