RacerX
Old Rhapsody User
This is the body of a letter which I plan to send to my state attorney general (one of the 18 involved in the Microsoft case) to express my views before they are allowed to add their input on Tuesday (November 6th, 2001) about the settlement reached by the Bush administration's Department of Justice and Microsoft. The views expressed are my opinion on the only possible solutions that could truly return the computer software industry to a competitive state.
Microsoft has worked very hard to become the apparent "only game in town" in the computer industry. When talking with others in my field (I currently work as an independent computer support technician), most are completely unaware that there are other operating systems (other than Microsoft and maybe Apple's Mac OS) that can be used for many tasks. When talking with average users (who's concerns are usually cost and productivity), most have never heard of anything else but Microsoft.
The three areas of concern:
(1) Operating system monopoly linked to Office suite monopoly
Because so many people use Microsoft Office, many people are currently force to own a copy to read documents sent to them. Microsoft does provide readers, but only for the Windows platform. A solution to this problem would be to remove control of the Office document formats from Microsoft and make them a standard that any software maker can use in creating applications. By creating a group that would watch over the formats, they can continue to be advanced as technology changes, but Microsoft's future Office products would be force to meet strict compliance with the standards. This provides other operating systems the possibility of having software that uses these standards, there by making them a reasonable alternative to running Microsoft Office on the only two operating systems Microsoft currently supports (Windows and Macintosh).
Because Microsoft is not the only software company to use document format as leverage, any and all software companies should be forced to create free cross platform readers for any software that uses a proprietary document format. The best model of this is Adobe Acrobat. The program to create and modify Acrobat (Portable Document Format, or pdf) documents is a product that can be purchased, but a reader (available for many platforms) is provided as a free download for those only wishing to view these documents.
(2) Microsoft's effort to make platform independent services Microsoft-only services (the internet and multimedia formats)
As originally envisioned and constructed, the internet was completely platform independent. If you had a computer that could connect (using TCP/IP), a browser that met the W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) Standards, and was able to execute Java applets, you had the ability to go anywhere and view anything without being forced to use any given platform. Microsoft has been working very hard to make it so that many services on the internet are Windows-only or Internet Explorer-only. This platform and browser dependence is designed to force people to use Microsoft or Microsoft-partner technologies. Microsoft's own Web server applications can be set up to turn away browsers that identify themselves or the platform they are running on as non-Microsoft. The internet has become more and more important to the average users experience while using computers. This effort by Microsoft to make users of non-Microsoft operating systems and non-Microsoft browsers second class citizens on the web is more damaging than any and all other tactics that Microsoft has used to date.
The only way to rectify this growing problem is to strongly enforce W3C Standards. By strongly, I mean removal of all sites on the internet that show browser or platform bias in accessing them. All multimedia should also fall under standards that are not controlled by any single software company. This can be enforced in the same way that I suggested that standard application document formats be handled. Software makers can create and sell any application to create multimedia, but must provide free cross platform viewers and/or browser plug-ins. Any multimedia format that tries to limit information on the internet should be removed until such bias is rectified.
(3) Operating system monopoly linked to pre-installation on computers
Currently the average user who wishes to buy an Intel-compatible computer is force to buy Windows with it. They have no choice, and getting a refund for the unused Windows operating system is very difficult. This is due to licensing agreements that Microsoft made with computer makers. To undo this damaging practice, I would suggest that the only computers that come with operating systems pre-installed are those made by the maker of the operating system. Examples would be Apple and the Mac OS, IBM and AIX or OS/2 Warp, Sun Microsystems and Solaris, and Silicon Graphics and Irix. If Microsoft wished to make computer hardware, they could then pre-install their own operating system. If a computer maker wished to create their own operating systems (even a version of Linux), they could then pre-install it on their systems. All others would be sold without an operating system installed. Computer resellers would have to have copies of non-Microsoft operating systems for sale next to Microsoft's operating systems with the prices clearly visible. The same should be done with office productivity suites. If a costumer buys a computer, they then can compare cost between Microsoft products (which are currently up to 5 times as expensive) to those of other companies. The choice is left to the consumer. The computer reseller should offer installation for any operating systems and office productivity software at the same cost no matter which is chosen.
It should be noted that none of the solutions recommended here remove Microsoft products from the choices the consumers would have. They are designed to increase consumers choices, and to reintroduce competitive pricing which as been absent from Microsoft's product line for many years. Also Microsoft would need to show that they have better products than other software makers instead of the current strategy (making consumers believe Microsoft is the only choice they have).
Please feel free to add your ideas, and send them to your representatives. Just because the Bush administration has signed off on this doesn't mean that the states have to.
Microsoft has worked very hard to become the apparent "only game in town" in the computer industry. When talking with others in my field (I currently work as an independent computer support technician), most are completely unaware that there are other operating systems (other than Microsoft and maybe Apple's Mac OS) that can be used for many tasks. When talking with average users (who's concerns are usually cost and productivity), most have never heard of anything else but Microsoft.
The three areas of concern:
(1) Operating system monopoly linked to Office suite monopoly
Because so many people use Microsoft Office, many people are currently force to own a copy to read documents sent to them. Microsoft does provide readers, but only for the Windows platform. A solution to this problem would be to remove control of the Office document formats from Microsoft and make them a standard that any software maker can use in creating applications. By creating a group that would watch over the formats, they can continue to be advanced as technology changes, but Microsoft's future Office products would be force to meet strict compliance with the standards. This provides other operating systems the possibility of having software that uses these standards, there by making them a reasonable alternative to running Microsoft Office on the only two operating systems Microsoft currently supports (Windows and Macintosh).
Because Microsoft is not the only software company to use document format as leverage, any and all software companies should be forced to create free cross platform readers for any software that uses a proprietary document format. The best model of this is Adobe Acrobat. The program to create and modify Acrobat (Portable Document Format, or pdf) documents is a product that can be purchased, but a reader (available for many platforms) is provided as a free download for those only wishing to view these documents.
(2) Microsoft's effort to make platform independent services Microsoft-only services (the internet and multimedia formats)
As originally envisioned and constructed, the internet was completely platform independent. If you had a computer that could connect (using TCP/IP), a browser that met the W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) Standards, and was able to execute Java applets, you had the ability to go anywhere and view anything without being forced to use any given platform. Microsoft has been working very hard to make it so that many services on the internet are Windows-only or Internet Explorer-only. This platform and browser dependence is designed to force people to use Microsoft or Microsoft-partner technologies. Microsoft's own Web server applications can be set up to turn away browsers that identify themselves or the platform they are running on as non-Microsoft. The internet has become more and more important to the average users experience while using computers. This effort by Microsoft to make users of non-Microsoft operating systems and non-Microsoft browsers second class citizens on the web is more damaging than any and all other tactics that Microsoft has used to date.
The only way to rectify this growing problem is to strongly enforce W3C Standards. By strongly, I mean removal of all sites on the internet that show browser or platform bias in accessing them. All multimedia should also fall under standards that are not controlled by any single software company. This can be enforced in the same way that I suggested that standard application document formats be handled. Software makers can create and sell any application to create multimedia, but must provide free cross platform viewers and/or browser plug-ins. Any multimedia format that tries to limit information on the internet should be removed until such bias is rectified.
(3) Operating system monopoly linked to pre-installation on computers
Currently the average user who wishes to buy an Intel-compatible computer is force to buy Windows with it. They have no choice, and getting a refund for the unused Windows operating system is very difficult. This is due to licensing agreements that Microsoft made with computer makers. To undo this damaging practice, I would suggest that the only computers that come with operating systems pre-installed are those made by the maker of the operating system. Examples would be Apple and the Mac OS, IBM and AIX or OS/2 Warp, Sun Microsystems and Solaris, and Silicon Graphics and Irix. If Microsoft wished to make computer hardware, they could then pre-install their own operating system. If a computer maker wished to create their own operating systems (even a version of Linux), they could then pre-install it on their systems. All others would be sold without an operating system installed. Computer resellers would have to have copies of non-Microsoft operating systems for sale next to Microsoft's operating systems with the prices clearly visible. The same should be done with office productivity suites. If a costumer buys a computer, they then can compare cost between Microsoft products (which are currently up to 5 times as expensive) to those of other companies. The choice is left to the consumer. The computer reseller should offer installation for any operating systems and office productivity software at the same cost no matter which is chosen.
It should be noted that none of the solutions recommended here remove Microsoft products from the choices the consumers would have. They are designed to increase consumers choices, and to reintroduce competitive pricing which as been absent from Microsoft's product line for many years. Also Microsoft would need to show that they have better products than other software makers instead of the current strategy (making consumers believe Microsoft is the only choice they have).
Please feel free to add your ideas, and send them to your representatives. Just because the Bush administration has signed off on this doesn't mean that the states have to.
