John,

>Like many, you focus on only one part of the story - the pure definiton of what a monopoly is supposed to be. Don't forget that a large part of this case is predicated on anti-competitive practices as well.
>
>Forget for a moment about what you may think is right or wrong. Tell me, can you buy an intel-based machine today - right off the shelve - packaged with another OS other than Windows - complete with application software?
>
>The answer is no.

Actually, this isn't true. You can get all kinds of Linux machines and from major vendors like IBM. Check out the following story at http://www5.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2491800,00.html?chkpt=zdnntop

IBM is porting Linux to ALL of its servers. I'd say that this was pretty significant, wouldn't you? <g>

Now, no way does that mean that Microsoft has or has not exercized monopolistic practices. But, you can purchase Linux-loaded machines.

>
>As a whole company, MS by itself, is not a monopoly. However, when it comes to OS's, MS Windows is a de-facto monopoly. And as such, MS has Monopoly power. They control what happens to Windows. OEM/ISV's are very much dependent on what MS does. It would be very easy for MS to twist the arms of folks to do what they want - hence - the comitting of anti-competitive acts. Do you really think a lot of this is hard to prove? As far as the browser issue goes - the browser itself is meaningless. However, the issue does illustrate the lengths that MS has gone to protect it's position.
>
>For anybody to think that MS has not been - for the lack of a better term - agressive at times - has his/her head in the sand. Too many e-mails have been made public to show just how over the top some MS managers have been willing to go.

Right - I think that the issue is that magic line between agressive business practices and monopoly. Personally, I'd like to know why a monopoly is intrinsically bad.

The absolutely most efficient type of government is an absolute total dictatorship. Is a dictatorship intrinsically bad? No, actually it is not. However, given human nature we all would no doubt agree that we would not want to live within a dictatorship. Not because that form of government is bad or evil but because human nature is intrinsically prone to evil and abuse of power. Most people do not like this truth but it is true.

If we took all the people out of Microsoft I seriously doubt we'd have to worry about the remaining stuff committing any crimes. <g>

The reason we have laws like the Sherman Anti-Trust Act is because we recognize that people will abuse power almost automatically when they have it. However, having such power doesn't automatically mean that this power will be abused, does it? No, of course not.

We write laws to protect us from ourselves.

Still, exercising this power isn't in itself an indication of wrong doing.

If Microsoft ported all their Office apps to Linux would this same bunch then complain that they (MSFT) were trying to "monopolize" Linux now? I'd bet they would. <g>

Again, Microsoft may well have committed an illegal act. If they have broken the law there should absolutely be remidies as is apparently now going to be the case.

>
>Do I think MS is an evil empire - do I think Bill Gates is the Borg?
>No.

I dunnno about this..

*rof'l*

>
>Do I think they at times have been extremely aggressive?
>Yes.

Indeed. Is being agressive against the law? Who is there out ther who is worth their salt who wants to compete to lose?

>
>As a developer, have a I benefited from the control that MS has over the OS?
>Yes

Dittos.

>
>Do I think there is some merit to the Gov'ts case?
>Yes.

Probably.

>
>Do I think the company should be broken up?
>Too early to tell at this point..
>But, if I were pressed for an answer - then No.
>
>Do I think MS own counter-proposal is sufficent?
>No.

Well, this is a classic poker game and we all know Bill loves poker. <g> Who is going to put their final offer on the table to start out? Any lawyer who did that would be shown the front door immediately - or perhaps sent back to file some papers in some catacomb. *bg*

>
>
>All that said, please stop with the generic citing of college texts and strict defintions found in the dictionary. If it were that cut and dry, this case would have been over in a week....

Agree totally. That's what makes this so interesting. I'm not at all convinced that Microsoft won't come away from this better off and if they turn their focus to the government and governmental processes in the form of lobbying I'd wager they will learn how to swim in those waters more quickly than their opponents think.

Best,

DD