November 2, 1998
Could the Microsoft trial lead to multiple versions of Windows?
By Bob O'Donnell
Ever since the specter of a Microsoft vs. U.S. Department of Justice trial first
appeared on the radar screens of both the IT and general press, speculations have been
rampant about just what such a trial could really mean to the computer industry. And now
that the trial is officially under way, the predictions of possible outcomes have grown
exponentially.
The problem is, a lot of the speculation does not seem particularly well-founded. Now,
I am by no means a legal expert on this issue, but common sense seems to tell me that, for
example, the trial will not end with Microsoft's being broken up into a bunch of smaller
companies. Oh, I know that lots of people might like that to happen, but really now, in
the era in which we are currently living (which is pretty pro-business, and particularly
pro-high-tech business), do you honestly think that it will?
I didn't think so.
At the other, more cynical, end of the spectrum, the possibility of Microsoft's getting
off scot-free does not seem very likely either -- although I'll admit that the idea has
more merit than the company break-up scenario.
Part of the issue is that none of the punishments seem to fit the crime, so to speak.
That is, except for one that I recently heard about when putting together a piece on the
trial for the Silicon Valley Business
television program. The potential "remedy" -- which is the official legal term
for a court-ordered punishment -- that was discussed in that piece is called
second-sourcing. What that means is, if Microsoft were forced to second-source Windows to
help decrease the power of its monopoly in desktop operating systems, the company would
have to license the source code for Windows to other companies, which could then come out
with their own versions of Windows. So, for example, there could be an IBM Windows and/or
an HP Windows and/or a Compaq Windows and/or an Apple Windows (heaven forbid!).
Now, all the open source people out there are thinking "a-ha" -- it's the
"Linuxization" of Windows. Well, sort of. In the case of second-sourcing,
however, the source code would not be free. Though Microsoft could be ordered to make the
Windows source available to other companies in this scenario, those other companies would
have to pay for the privilege -- and probably a lot of money. But once that occurs then,
yes, there could be different brands of Windows, much as there are different distributions
of Linux.
If you think about it a bit, this is probably the most intriguing potential outcome to
the case there could be. Microsoft would lose its stranglehold on the desktop OS, and
other companies could offer different versions of the basic Windows operating system with
more, different, or fewer features and technologies incorporated into that OS. Imagine,
for example, a Windows "lite" version that cuts out all the stuff that bloats
Windows installations to nearly 200MB. Or, for example, a version in which the primary
interface was actually via Netscape Communicator instead of Internet Explorer.
The ramifications of such a development would be very interesting, but it raises lots
of important questions as well. Would the licensees have access to future versions of the
Windows OS source code? Without it, frankly, the licenses would be of limited value. Also,
how could you guarantee compatibility across the different versions of Windows? Linux
devotees may be willing to put up with tweaking application source code or installation
scripts to enable applications to work across different distributions, but that idea
absolutely will not fly in the Windows world.
Even if such a scenario were to come to pass -- and remember, this is pure speculation
at this point -- Microsoft would unquestionably be the leader in the Windows operating
system market. Most people and most IT departments would probably be comfortable with only
the Microsoft version of Windows.
But even if Redmond maintained, say, at least a 90 percent share, the very fact that it
would have to compete with other potential Windows vendors would undoubtedly lead to
better, more robust operating systems. And that, quite honestly, is about the only
potential outcome from this trial that would definitely benefit both businesses and
consumers.
If, it has been argued, the point of antitrust is ultimately to provide that benefit,
then it seems second-sourcing Windows should be pursued.
©
Copyright 1998, by InfoWorld Publishing Corp., a
subsidiary of IDG Communications, Inc. Reprinted from InfoWorld,
155 Bovet Road, San Mateo, CA 94402. Further reproduction is prohibited.
