On 28 Apr 00, at 23:02, Paul Courry wrote:

> Does that mean we need to saturate Redmond with pesticide?

No.  It means that OS development field has essentially been a
"sterile" environment for the past 20 years (and more). This is in no
small part due to the "proprietary" nature of the software itself and
the jealousy with which the owners of that software held on to their
"intellectual property" (now there is an oxy-moron) rights.  The
economics of the situation created where these companies erected
extremely high barrier costs to entry for the use of their software
gave Microsoft an incredible competitive opportunity. What is most
surprising is that it has taken almost two decades for most companies
to wake up to what has been going on under their feet.

However, Microsoft is now probably at the end of its "happy time"
regardless of what the DoJ does or doesn't do.  It may actually have
been a perception within the company that the "happy time" was coming
to a close that prompted many, if not most, of the types of anti-
competitive actions that have led directly to Microsoft's current
situation vis a vis the USA DoJ.

I am sure the BG didn't know or sanctioned most of what has been laid
at Microsoft's door.   I am equally sure that his style and expressed
beliefs encouraged those that worked for him to draw the appropriate
conclusions and to act on them. BG's, and Microsoft's, problem is
that whatever he, or his lawyers claim, one cannot avoid your
responsibility when subordinates act out your expressed desires, even
if you didn't actually order them to do it.

Be all that as it may be, the Internet has indeed changed everything
and Windows XXXX no longer enjoys the sterile environment that is
needed for one species to eradicate all others.  The Internet
provides at a stroke the larger, variegated, enriched, environment
that permits, and even encourages, diversity. Now there really are
niches, where none existed before. Linux is only the tip of the
larger, ever growing, iceberg of on-line software delivery and direct
distribution.

There is a LOT of software available on the Net that works well,
costs little or nothing, and is more reliable, has more features, is
more regularly updated, and has better support, than much of what is
available through the "traditional" distribution chain.

To maintain its dominance this past decade, Microsoft has
increasingly needed to control and to restrict the distribution of
software at all levels right down to the end user.  The existence of
Internet now makes this approach to controlling the environment
futile. With or without the judicial mandated break-up of Microsoft,
the end to Microsoft's current form and its business practice was
coming anyway, certainly within the next five to ten years.

Regards,
Jim
---
James B. Byrne                Harte & Lyne Limited
vox: +1 905 561 1241          9 Brockley Drive
fax: +1 905 561 0757          Hamilton, Ontario
mailto:[log in to unmask]  Canada L8E 3C3