To: WSFAlist at keithlynch.net
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 21:41:04 -0500
Subject: [WSFA] Re: equal pay
From: ronkean at juno.com
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

On Thu, 4 Apr 2002 12:22:21 -0500 "Strong, Lee" <StrongL at MTMC.ARMY.MIL>
writes:
> Lee,
>         <Seriousness alert>  What is so bad about Bill Gates and/or
> Microsoft?  I've heard a lot of hostile comments but I've never
> heard any
> real evidence of wrongdoing.  Please provide specifics.  Thank you,
>
> Lee Who's Opposed to Witchhunts
>

It does seem like there is a lot more smoke than fire there, much like
the Michael Milken junk bond case.  I was unable to get a clear idea of
just what it was that Milken was supposed to have done to merit being
imprisoned and fined hundreds of millions of dollars.  I have heard it
claimed that his financing activities created many thousands of jobs in
the 80s with the companies which raised capital.

My impression is that Gates put MS in the right place at the right time,
and that he deserves recognition for having brilliant business sense in
that.  But I don't think that Gates knew early on how spectacular the
growth of personal computing would be, and how spectacular the success of
MS would be, and that he would become a multi-multi-billionaire.

As far as wrongdoing, there have been rumors that MS made use of others'
software and ideas to get started, but was perhaps too small and
insignificant for anyone to notice or care at the time.  If it's any
consolation, MS software has probably been pirated millions of times more
often than MS ever pirated software, if it ever did.  Later, there seems
to have been a more verifiable pattern of 'borrowing' ideas and software,
as when MS was sued by Apple for copying the 'look and feel' of the
Macintosh interface for Windows, and the time they were successfully sued
for copying disk compression software, and had to pull MS-DOS 6.1 off the
market and settle with the plaintiff.  Also, there is a pattern of MS
buying outside software to add to Windows (e.g. ScanDisk) - there's
nothing wrong with that, but it indicates a propensity to copy, over
developing (copying is cheaper).

It seems that MS, once it got really big, would sometimes copy or imitate
ideas or software, and if sued, it would outlawyer the plaintiff, or buy
the plaintiff.  The morality here is kind of murky, since I don't have
all the facts.

But I think what really drove the government's case against MS was the
practice of MS using its market power to put competitors, and potential
competitors, at a disadvantage.  For example, MS would insist, as a
condition of providing heavily discounted OEM licensed copies of Windows
for installation in new PCs, that icons for MS services appear on the
desktop, and that icons for non-MS services and products not appear.
Also, for the discount, MS requires that the PC vendors pre-load Windows
on all computers.  Such marketing practices may well be arguably illegal,
but that does not mean they should be.   After all, Coke and Pepsi do
much the same thing, offering a bigger discount to restaurants who agree
to exclusively carry their product line of soft drinks.

Ron Kean

.

________________________________________________________________