You would think that the
Findings of Fact from the Microsoft Anti-trust legal battle would be dull - but nada!
If you haven't read it guys, it makes for some interesting reading. Apparently Bill really has a woodie for Netscape and it shows in the evidence big time. Microsoft has been dumping $130 mil a year (over 1000 programmers) into IE since 1995 because Bill doesn't want Netscape to gain any inroads into a market evolving towards an internet-centric paradigm.
Bill's business practices are more like a playground bully (no news there) and are evidenced in their dealings with IBM, Intel, Apple, Real Networks, and just about everyone else in the PC game.
You wouldn't believe how much they have squashed innovation that poses even the slightest challenge to their position as top dog OS and their aversion to anything that gives added functionality to Windows that they don't directly control. They threaten and leverage their position with OEMs to pull anyone into line that doesn't play along and then incorporate the technology if and when they feel like it. There is evidence on top of evidence in this document. It just goes on and on.
But the upshot is that anything that gives computers more flexibility and works against Microsoft being the sole source of software in what it sees as it's markets and OS's gets sat on and doesn't see the light of day until they can make sure it poses no threat from innovative middleware developers.
If computers are any kind of part in your profession, this is highly recommended. Or if you just want to read about Bill almost going whacko whenever someone dares to challenge his OS. Much more behind the scenes if you read between the lines. In a lot of negotiations with IBM over marking PC with OS/2 and the IBM office suite, many references are made to pleasing (appeasing?) Bill. It's dirty pool at it's best (worst?).
It's better than a lot of novels. The problem is that this is all real and affects everyone more than most realize.
Any Microsoft defenders out there ought to read it too. It's an eye-opener.
[This message has been edited by Renfield (edited 10-15-2000).]
