Okay, I confused you with someone else re SUNW sales.
M31, we're not changing each other's minds. I'm not going to state unequivocally that MS has not done things which may have unfairly stifled the competition, mainly through exclusive agreements. Even though exclusive agreements are common place everywhere in the business world, I do see how since MS does have a customer-granted dominating position in the PC OS market, it leaves possibilities for agreements with OEMs which may unfairly "tie" for instance Office Suite preloads with the OS preload. So if MS has done this, then the courts through the DOJ lawsuit will undoubtedly address this.
As for the browser controversy, I'm simply not real sympathetic with Netscape or any other browser company. The reason is, I see browsers as a function of the operating system, and hence a legitimate area for Microsoft to pursue. Some here have argued that browsing is more a separate application, like word processing or accounting. But yet, is it not true that Netscape hoped, as the DOJ complaint clearly outlines, that the Netscape browser would eventually morph into an OS in it's own right, a "platform independent" OS? Yes, this is true. Therefore the browser is obviously very much thought of as a beginning kernel of a full-fledged OS. So the arguments that MS doesn't have a right to pursue integrated browsing in Win98 just doesn't hold water with me.
But re this statement, "It's a patch specifically designed to cut off Netscape's air supply.:
If a Microsoft technological enhancement to their Windows OS causes some software company to lose sales, that doesn't specifically make MS guilty of anti-trust laws. If that was the way anti-trust laws worked, then any third-party provider of some OS enhancement would effectively stand as a roadblock to improvements and enhancements in a very legitimate and important piece of software, the PC operating system. That PC OS market is indeed dominated by MS, but if not MS, it would be some other company: The natural and efficient movement in the OS market is to move towards and gather around a standard. And again I have to remind, regarding browsers: As far as I know, the there isn't many patents granted on "look and feel" of software, or patents on functions performed by software.
The way it looks to me is, MS execs made some very aggressive statements about a would-be competitor who had visions of grandeur about eating off of MS's plate. Then in the process of conforming the MS OS to the industry-wide internet revolution, that would-be competitor has begun to feel squeezed. I personally think that best lesson in this is simply that if you think you can make a better mouse-trap than Microsoft, you would be well-advised to have a viable plan for doing that.
I still can't figure out why there is so much hand-wringing and emotion over Netscape, when there are scads of other companies who have also felt the the effects of competition with Microsoft. |
