|
‘Browser Wars’ almost destroyed Microsoft By Michael C. Guilmette Jr. Originally published on March 11, 2004, in the Bay Mills News.
Now, Bill Gates is a favorite target for criticism, resentment and downright hostility — his list of detractors is long and distinguished. Some is not deserved, such as the roasting Gates receives for his alleged statement that “640K ought to be enough for anybody,” — a reference to computer memory that he roundly denies and ranks highly in the annals of Internet urban legends. However, many users of Microsoft products feel justified in their disapproval, and one of the biggest was the U.S. Department of Justice. Legal troubles began for Microsoft back in 1990, when the Federal Trade Commission began looking into accusations that the software giant was attempting to unfairly dominate the software market through collusion with IBM. Gates had been selling software since 1975, releasing the original version of MS-DOS (MicroSoft Disk Operating System) in 1981 and Microsoft Windows two years later. All through that time, Microsoft fended off complaints that the early versions of Windows were knock-offs of Macintosh operating systems — a stigma that Microsoft never really overcame. As Windows and other Microsoft products began dominating the marketplace, the focus shifted from how Gates was creating his software to how he was selling it. First was the FTC scrutiny that was handed off to the Department of Justice in 1993 and resulted in an agreement by Microsoft not to stifle competition in software — not an easy feat, considering that the company already held most of the market. Troubles continued when Microsoft was accused in 1997 of “bundling” software — particularly, the company was requiring that personal computer vendors include Microsoft’s Internet Explorer with the installations of Windows 95. For those that do not recall the early versions of the now most common Web browser, Internet Explorer paled in comparison not only to today’s browsers, but more importantly, the browsers available at the time — namely, Netscape’s Navigator. Gates had underestimated the importance of the Internet while Netscape became a rising star in the web browsing business, and therefore needed to play catch-up. The “Browser Wars” led to a $1-million-a-day fine levied against Microsoft, but that did little to stop the company’s practices. Gates released Windows 98, and while it was considerably more stable than its predecessor, Windows 98 was mainly a white-washed Windows 95 which now included Internet Explorer as an 'integral component' of the operating system. The fine eventually died on appeal, and the federal courts ruled that Microsoft could integrate software into Windows 98 in any way it pleased as long as it improved the product. Microsoft’s victory, however, was very short-lived, as six days later, May 18, 1998, the Department of Justice and 20 state attorneys general filed an antitrust lawsuit against the software company. As the legal wranglings plodded on, Microsoft’s integration strategy began to bear fruit. Market research in September 1998 showed that Internet Explorer had taken the lead in the browser market over Netscape’s Navigator browser. The trial continued for two years, with a host of industry witnesses testifying both for and against Microsoft. The debate raged outside the courtroom as well, with opponents calling for the destruction of Microsoft and villifying Gates on one side, while supporters called the lawsuit unnecessary and mean-spirited. Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh decried the trial as an attempt by the Clinton-era Justice Department to fleece a successful business. On April 3, 2000, U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson, the ringmaster of the legal circus, ruled that Microsoft had abused its monopoly power in order to lessen competition, and that these actions harmed consumers. Judge Jackson ordered the breakup of the company into two parts — drawing cheers from Microsoft’s detractors. Microsoft’s attorneys appealed, and a federal appeals court reversed the decision in June 2001. On Sept. 6 of the same year, the Justice Department stated that it would no longer seek the breakup. The European Union and the State of Massachusetts held out, but the suit was effectively over. What was the outcome of the decade-long legal battle? Aside from millions of tax dollars spent on an unsuccessful trial, Microsoft was forced by consumer pressure to release better quality software instead of the mediocre products that it had been pushing with glitzy and aggressive marketing. Windows XP, the present version of Microsoft’s venerable operating system, is a far improvement over the clunky Windows 3.1 and the bug-ridden Windows 95, but the Internet Explorer integration issue still exists and sometimes causes havoc. The vast majority of computer viruses are written to exploit security flaws in Internet Explorer and Outlook Express, Microsoft’s bundled e-mail program. Microsoft is taking a slower, more cautious approach to software development as well. The long-awaited release of Service Pack 2 for Windows XP, which is to touted to be a dramatic improvement, is scheduled for June of this year, while the next generation of Windows, dubbed “Longhorn” is expected to debut as late as 2006. Microsoft products are on at least nine of every 10 computers, and a strong competitor is not making itself known to the general public. 640K may not be enough for everyone, but Microsoft software may have to be. Related sites: www.microsoft.com, www.netscape.com, www.wired.com/news/antitrust. • Mike Guilmette is a staff reporter/columnist with the Bay Mills News. His website can be seen at http://www.sigperl.com/. |
|||
|
|||
|
Copyright © 2004, Michael C. Guilmette Jr. |
Ninety-five percent of the people out there who use the Internet have not only heard of Microsoft, but they depend on the multi-billion dollar corporation for their information needs. This level of dependency has served Microsoft and its venerable founder, Bill Gates, very well — and to some, too well.
