Glenn Cole <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

<lots snipped>

>While I personally question both the legal and ethical actions MS has
>taken, I have no idea how a "fair" outcome can result without splitting
>MS into separate OS and app companies.  I'm certainly not calling for
>that, and neither is DOJ.  It will be interesting to see what happens.

On the other hand isn't this exactly the point?  The Bell system was broken
up precisely because the local parts of the Bell System made it very
difficult for other long-distance companies to compete on an equal basis.
For those of us that remember the startup of MCI, it is almost miraculous
that they were able to stay around.  The Bell System did everything in
their power to put them out of business.

It is pretty hard to introduce competition in the local phone system - the
present attempts only mess around with minor billing and administrative
aspects and don't really touch the physical plant.  Similarly, it is
difficult to have competition in the OS business because it is so closely
tied to the hardware and because there must be a uniform interface for
application developers.  In fact, MS has a monopoly in the OS.  It is using
this monopoly to restrict competition in application development and
therefore should be regulated just like any other monopoly.

MS should be broken up, just as the Bell system was broken up, so that the
OS is kept completely separate from applications.  There were definite
disadvantages to the breakup of the telephone monopoly, but we learnt to
live with them and now have the cheapest long-distance rates in the world
(by a considerable factor).  So with breaking up MS - there will be
disadvantages in the short term, but, in the long term, greater competition
will lead to better and less expensive software.

John D. Alleyn-Day
Alleyn-Day International
408-286-6421   408-286-6474 (Fax)
[log in to unmask]       http://www.Alleyn-Day.com