X-no-Archive:yes
I have received many messages where people compare the Microsoft trial with a)
the AT&T breakup in the mid 80s and
b) the Standard Oil breakup in the 1920s.  They are not the same.

AT&T owned the technology, the distribution and the end devices.  They made
their own switches, and used these switches in the various central offices.  I
am somewhat familiar with the case as I used to work for Northern Telecom.
 This is the company that invented the digital switch.  Before the break up,
they could not sell a digital switch anywhere in the US.  AT&T owned the entire
environment and would not buy these switches.  The consumers could not get
newer technology and they were paying exorbitant prices for long distance.  The
break up of AT&T allowed Northern Telecom to sell switches to the regional
Bells (RBOC) and forced AT&T to develop their own digital switches.  It also
allowed for MCI and Sprint and other long distance carriers to come on board
and lower the prices dramatically.  Did the services get better?  I suspect
that is a regional thing, it very much depends on the RBOC where you live.
 Overall, the prices of long distance have dropped considerably and the
technology has expanded.  Judge Greene oversaw the break up and was making
rulings for a fairly long period of time, but business decisions in many
companies where influenced by and depended on these rulings.  That should never
have been the case.

Rockefeller's Standard Oil owned the rights to the exploration, the drilling,
controlled the distribution of the oil and actually owned the gas stations.
 The end users were harmed directly in this vertical business.  The prices were
whatever one company, even one person decided.

In the Microsoft case, the end users are not being harmed.  Anybody who wants
to be in the business can.  If you develop software, you can sell it.  The
majority of end users have decided to use Windows as their operating system.
 However, a sizable portion of end users are using Mac, Linux and other OS.
 There are several people even on this list who will tell you they have no MS
products and are doing everything they need to do with their laptops or desktop
or servers.  Microsoft has created more wealth than most other company around
and is very much a driving force behind the Internet revolution.

Now there are rumbling about what the future may hold.  The judge might be
telling MS what to put and what not to put in their OS.  Future corporate
decisions may be influenced by and depend on the whims of judge
Penfield-Jackson.  Is this what we want in this industry?  Do we really want
the government to tell us what to develop and what not to develop?  Do we want
someone who until a year ago did not know what a computer is, making these
kinds of decisions in this industry?

Now what is the remedy?  Since this is a civil case, not a criminal case, a
fine is not in the cards.  The decree will change the environment.


Kind regards,

Denys. . .

Denys Beauchemin
HICOMP
(800) 323-8863  (281) 288-7438         Fax: (281) 355-6879
denys at hicomp.com                             www.hicomp.com