Let's face it, in today's world we are using computers more and more. The growthof accessibility to the Internet has given us a brand new definition toconnectivity, thus exponentially widening the wealth of information at ourfingertips. Those of us who are computer and Internet users have experiencedthis rapid growth, yet many users do not understand some the"trade-offs" that have been made to bring this level of user-friendlytechnology to desk-tops all over the world.
It's just so easy. Buy it, bring ithome, plug it in, insert a disk, and your on the Internet. From the usersperspective this is an incredible leap in the right direction. However, from abusiness point of view we must be very cautious. Due to the numbers of businesswho are involved in the production of computers and the fact that Microsoft hasbeen not only a corner stone in development, but a household name since the verybeginning, creates a potentially hazardous business environment.
This has beenthe topic for many heated debates. The main question Microsoft has beenconfronted with is weather or not they have created a monopoly or merelyexperienced a large market share and a competitive advantage stemming from theirdedication to provide more efficient systems. Historically, the United Stateshas set a precedent to penalize companies who demonstrated monopolistic actions.In the Sherman and Clayton Anti-Trust Acts, the United States officially mademonopolies against the law. However, companies like AT have endured thesechanges, thus tearing down their walls of domination, allowing room forcompetition, and ensuring economic growth across the board.
The reason whyMicrosoft is currently under investigation is a result of some of the followingideas and events: O Users have extremely limited operating systems that arecompatible with existing hardware and the only operating system included withthe purchase of a new computer is Windows. O Integration of the MicrosoftInternet Explorer with the already powerful Microsoft Windows operating systemis viewed as a monopoly using their already supreme power to seal offcompetition in yet another area where a market already exists. (and) O TacticsMicrosoft has used in the development of other applications such as webdevelopment and design (i.e. the creation of FrontPage) have createdcompatibility issues that require extensions that can only be provided byMicrosoft. These are all examples of how Microsoft has jockeyed for position inthis new, competitive, and obviously undefined computer business arena,eliminating competition while claiming to be the ultimate saint.
To prove thatMicrosoft is indeed a monopolistic force in the operating systems market DavidChun, a student at UCLA, conducted a survey asking several different OriginalEquipment Manufactures (OEMs) these very simple questions. 1. Do you offer anyother operating systems? 2. Can I buy computers, any models, without buyingWindows? 3.
If not, why? 4. Can I return Windows and get a refund? After Mr.Chun contacted several of these OEMs, Sony, DELL, NEC, Gateway, and IBM (just toname a few), he found the following information: OEM QSTN 1 QSTN 2 QSTN 3 QSTN 4SONY No No We are under contract with Microsoft No DELL No No We are undercontract with Microsoft No NEC No No We do not have contracts with other O/Smanufs. No IBM No OS2 $99 But comes with Windows That's just the way it is.
NoAs you can see from the illustration, not one of these major OEMs offers itscustomers any options. It seems as though Microsoft has everyone's hands tiedand all bases fully covered concerning the O/S market. Due to the fact thatMicrosoft won't even grant OEMs some sort of refund policy to offer"wayward" customers who aren't interested in buying their O/S is justplain selfish, pushing other potential O/Ss deeper into the corner they arealready trying to exist in. You have to begin to wonder what this giant isreally all about.
Everyone knows that for a user to obtain access through theInternet they need a browser and an Internet Service Provider (ISP). A webbrowser is a software application that translates hypertext markup language(HTML), allowing us to "surf" the web. Recently Microsoft has decidedto bundle their version of a browser, Microsoft Internet Explorer, with theiroperating system, Windows. Microsoft views this as merely adding an icedispenser to its already existing refrigerator. However, a company like Netscapewho has been a leader in the market for years thinks much differently. Indeed,it may seem as simple as adding an ice dispenser (a simple upgrade), yet isthere really an independent market that is going around trying to install icedispensers? I say no.
The browser market does in fact exist outside the realm ofan operating system and Microsoft hinders these other competitors by using itsinfluence in another market with a completely different product to gain adefinite edge over all other competition. In a case between Telex andInternational Business Machines, the court found, "...a monopoly may usepractices that any company, regardless of size, could legally employ.
..",however, "...
they cannot...use market power in such a way as to preventcompetition.
" Whether Microsoft has actually committed this act is yet tobe proven, but I personally think the ground for this argument could beestablished. One thing is for sure. The computer industry is unlike any other inexistence today. It remains the fastest changing industry in the world and hasthe government running in circle about how to create and enforce legislation onmatter such as the Microsoft Anti-Trust issue. Until the government successfullydefines how far a monopoly can develop itself and how it uses existing powers toleverage itself in other markets the computer industry will sadly remain aWonderland where anything is possible if you're the one with all thepower.
BibliographyDavid Chun. "Required to Buy Microsoft Windows." July 08, 1998.http://www.
essential.org/antitrust/ms/jun3survey.html Bruce Holcomb."Recent Decision." The George Washington Law Review.
May 1980. DanCheck. "The Case Against Microsoft." http://www.compuserve.com/homepages/spazz.
htmStanley Sporkin. "Memorandum Opinion" http://research.bryant.edu/~mbougon/BU-400
