Back home

SectionsTodaySponsored by:
Top story

Judge's finding
Finding of Fact in the case:
-Coverage index
-HTML, 400K
-PDF file, 420K Line

Opinions
-Reader thoughts about a Microsoft breakup Line

Coverage
-Antritrust law Line

Past Cases
-IBM
-ATT
-Standard Oil
-ALCOA
-American Tobacco Line

Background
-1990
-1994
-1995
-1996
-1997
-1998
-1999

Line

Key Players
-Bill Gates
-Other figures
Line

Web sites
-Justice Dept.
-Microsoft
-Netscape
-IBM Line

MESSAGE BOARD
Thoughts about the Microsoft ruling

Many local figures cheered the Nov. 5 ruling declaring Microsoft Corp. a monopoly. Some thought the ruling was too harsh. But others believed the ruling was a necessary step to contain the software giant's overwhelming market power.

Kyle, Seattle
It's a bit hard to believe that the judge would not take into account the millions of Microsoft users that are unbelievably happy with the products and service they recieve from Microsoft. Compitition is great, I suppose that's why all of the smaller companies had big smiles on their faces when Microsoft came knocking at their door with checkbook in hand.

CA, Billerica
From an entrepreneurial stand point what an accomplishment! Few men have taken a vision to market, executed with precision and became so successful that their empire was deemed a monopoly.

Pam Dixon, Brookline
Now, maybe we can get some good products that are easy to use and actually work.

Tom Evans, Watertown
Millions of happy users? Everyday people who use Microsoft products are not happy. Microsoft's products are difficult to use and unstable. If competition were fair, it would be easy for another developer to come along with something more easy to use and more stable and take away market share from Microsoft. Many have tried all have failed due to Microsoft's relentless licensing behavior where they forbid manufacturers to bundle non-Microsoft products with Windows. With regard to Microsoft's big checks, people of course had smiles. That is the only way to due business with in the market with Microsoft. If you have a clever and successful idea, you either hope that you do not become a blip on the Microsft radar or if you do, you hope that Microsoft decides to buy you instead of developing a competing product. If they develop a competing product, you are doomed.

Nell Williams, Lafayette, La.
As an owner of two computers, and as a consumer of Microsoft products, I have not be hurt by Microsoft. I believe this was a personal vendetta by the Justice Department. Is it possible that Bill Gates did not contribute to Clinton's campaign or perhaps did not contribute enough to Clinton/Gore? I wish Janet Reno's Justice Department would pursue the illegal foreign contributions by the Riady family and the Chinese government to the Clinton/Gore campaign with the same devotion that she went after an American businessman that has given us what Bill Gates gave us, user friendly software at an affordable price.

Chuck Zito, Boston
Nell, give me a break with your political conspiracy theories! All this ruling will do is establish a precedent that unfair practices to restrict competition will not be tolerated. Microsoft will settle and continue to be a driving force in our economy. It's not a big deal, but it shows that the Justice Department will step in when needed. By the way, how fair is it to companies like Netscape, when Microsoft includes Internet Explorer free with Windows software? They put it in for free, so that no one would buy the better Netscape Navigator, and they did it to try to run Netscape out of business. 95% of new computers come with Windows 98 pre-loaded, and that's great, but the browser and other applications should not be forced to be bundled in there also. That's the bottom line.

Ronald Brissenden, Quincy
ABOUT TIME, BREAK THEM UP....

Al Verrier, Burlington
While Microsoft's behavior has been predatory anyone in the computer industry can tell you that PC's are cheaper and easier to use because of them. Almost all software is compatible with MS products because it has to be. With no MS to force standardization we would still be trying to figure out if this box of software runs with that computer. However, their behavior in bundling to force companies to use only their products is wrong. At this point they are so big that they are starting to damage the industry by buying out promising products which then do not get the attention or development that they deserve. The judgement of this case must be carefully done so as not to damage the industry, but still allow some increased measure of competition.

Banana Cream
Yes! Just what we wanted. This is the real pie in the face for Gates.

John, Woburn
I'm glad the judge ruled against Microsoft,because now many other smaller companies with better products will actually be able to sell them. For example, how many people reading this have Microsoft Word? And how many have Lotus Wordpro? I'll bet most of you haven't even heard of Wordpro, and why because Microsoft's product almost drove it off the market. Many small companies will have better sales at lower prices which is good for all users.

Jack O'Leary, Eugene, Oregon
Winning is everything to Bill Gates. Too bad he lost this one. Maybe he'll treat his competition fairly now.



 


Advertise on Boston.com

or
Use Boston.com to do business with the Boston Globe:
advertise, subscribe, contact the news room, and more.

Click here for assistance.
Please read our user agreement and user information privacy policy.

© Copyright 2000 Boston Globe Electronic Publishing, Inc.