![]() ![]() |
|
The big news in the computing world this weekend was the ruling
that Microsoft do indeed possess a monopoly. The DOJ anti-trust
hearing is not over yet, but the findings of fact document just
published makes clear Microsoft's dominance and unscrupulousness:
". . . Microsoft has demonstrated that it will use its prodigious market power and immense profits to harm any firm that insists on pursuing initiatives that could intensify competition against any of Microsoft's core products . . . The ultimate result is that some innovations that would truly benefit consumers never occur for the sole reason that they do not coincide with Microsoft's self-interest." Strong words indeed. What the final judgement in this case will be is not yet clear, but pundits are predicting that the great Microsoft empire will be split up into independent companies. Perhaps one offspring will produce Windows, another MS Office and so on. While this may harm Bill Gates's ego, I cannot see it making any great change to the PC market, certainly not in the short term. The damage has already been done; any remedial action will take years to make an effect. One interesting suggestion that has been made is that MS should be split into two companies both of which own the rights to Windows. They would each develop and market Windows separately from then on, in effect producing competing products based on the current Windows. But I don't think that this rather contrived route to competition is enough to spur some innovation in the OS market. The problem, as the findings of fact states, is the barrier to entry in the desktop OS market which Microsoft have ensured is high as they can possibly make it. Consumers won't but an operating system if there is a poor selection of software available for it; developers won't develop for a minority platform. Breaking up MS will not change this fact. As far as users and consumers are concerned there is no viable alternative to Windows. Whatever verdict the court arrives at, it cannot magic software out of thin air. It can prohibit MS's draconian OEM licensing policy and make it possible to ship machines with, say, BeOS installed. But it cannot make consumers want to use BeOS in the first place. How does all this affect the Amiga? I don't think it makes any difference to be honest. An MS Office company spun-off from the current Microsoft might be inclined to port their applications to other platforms, but I cannot see the Amiga as being one of them. So, the game hasn't changed. We're still waiting either for Gateway to sort out its plans with regard to the Amiga or sell it to somebody who can or for some third party to build a spiritual successor to the Amiga. The existence or non-existence of Microsoft really doesn't feature for the moment. |