"A computer on every desk and in every home, all running Microsoft software." --Bill Gates, Founder and CEO of Microsoft Corporation (Gleick).
Those words, uttered when Microsoft was founded, have come shockingly close to reality as the software Goliath has acquired a vast majority of the market share in operating systems. In a recent U. S. Senate hearing regarding competition in the electronic age, Jim Barksdale, CEO of Netscape, asked the assembled crowd to indicate, by a show of hands, how many used PCs. Nearly all raised their hands. When he asked how many had a PC not running Microsoft Windows, none responded. "Gentlemen, that's a monopoly," declared Barksdale (Meeks).
There is no doubt that Microsoft's current position is due largely to sharp business decisions. Their first big break came in 1980 when IBM needed an operating system for the PC it was building. IBM commissioned Microsoft to provide the operating system, and Microsoft purchased what would become MS-DOS from Seattle Computer (Wallace, 204). In the years that followed, Microsoft made deals with PC clone makers to sell MS-DOS with all their new computers, making it the standard OS with which PCs were sold.
While Microsoft's business decisions have been unquestionably adept, some would argue that good business isn't the only way Microsoft has acquired its power. Harsh practices date back to 1985, when Apple Computer was developing a programming product called MacBASIC for the Macintosh. Up until that time, Microsoft had produced the BASIC which was sold with every Macintosh. When Bill Gates learned of Apple's developments, he threatened to withhold the license for Apple II Basic, then Apple Computer's biggest selling computer, unless Apple agreed to cancel the project. Apple Relented, and two years of development went down the drain (290).
"Anything not a direct lie or clearly illegal is OK to do and should be done if it advances Microsoft's tribal cause. This licenses the worst sorts of manipulation, lies, tortured self-justifications and so on," according to Mitchell Kapor, Founder and former CEO of Lotus Development, one of Microsoft's greatest competitors during the 80s (Gleick).
Another tactic Microsoft has used repeatedly to hold onto a market is commonly known as "vaporware." This technique, now considered a standard way of doing business in the computer industry, was employed by Microsoft as early as 1983. In theory, if one makes a grandiose enough product announcement, promising features beyond anything currently on the market, months or even years before such an invention materializes on store shelves, potential customers will not buy a competitor's already-available wares.
In November of 1983, to fend off interest in competitors' graphical interface products, Microsoft announced that Windows would be available before the end of 1984. Convincing other companies that Windows would become the industry standard, Microsoft formed alliances with 24 computer makers who agreed to support Windows (Wallace, 257-258). "Other companies had already announced windowing products, but we were able to persuade OEMs to wait for ours," commented one of the programmers who worked on the early development of Windows at Microsoft (296).
During 1984, Windows development fell behind. In addition to management problems at Microsoft, programmers had trouble squeezing the required features into the cramped 256K of memory and 8088 processors. The project was delayed. VisiCorp and Quarterdeck already had graphical products on the market, but customers were willing to wait for Microsoft's because they were convinced Windows would become industry standard (296, 308).
The first version of Windows was finally released at Fall Comdex in 1985, and received InfoWorld's "Golden Vaporware Award." In the marketplace, it was a bitter failure. PCs of that time were too slow to run it, and applications had not yet been developed (313-314). While the delay of Windows was partly the result of overambition, Microsoft learned that if it could convince the industry the next technological breakthrough was around the corner, people would wait instead of buying from a competitor.
Between 1992 and 1995 , Microsoft used this strategy again to hold its dominant position. In 1992, IBM was selling OS/2, a 32-bit, preemptively multitasked, object-oriented, memory-protected Windows-compatible operating system. OS/2 even won a technical excellence award from PC Magazine (Reiswig, 111). Microsoft, through promises of what the next version of Windows NT and "Chicago" would be able to do, persuaded the entire PC industry to wait until 1994, the supposed release date for what would eventually become Windows 95. After several delays, in August of 1995, Microsoft released Windows 95, a technically inferior implementation of what OS/2 had done years before.
Microsoft's dominance is also due to the nature of the software industry itself. A product's value increases when more people use it (Arquit). The reasoning is quite simple. When the user base is larger, developers are more willing to write applications. As more applications for a platform are released, more people will want it. The cycle feeds on itself. Since Microsoft was first to convince everybody that its platform was standard, the momentum kept it on top for years.
The adverse effects of the OS monopoly have recently begun to surface. One such end, whose true scope has only been brought to light recently due to Microsoft's legal battle with the Justice Department, is Microsoft's use of Windows dominance to gain control of the web browser industry. In May of 1996, when Compaq attempted to include Netscape's competing web browser with PCs they sold, Microsoft threatened to withhold the Windows 95 license, which would have effectively prevented Compaq from selling PCs with Windows 95 pre-installed (Nickell). More recently, Senator Orrin Hatch reported that when he called Dell Computer to order a PC with Netscape installed, he was refused. During questioning of Michael Dell, CEO of Dell Computer, Senator Hatch commented, "I was surprised to learn you do not offer consumers the option to load Netscape on PCs" (Goodin).
Microsoft also used Windows 95 when it was released to advertise the Microsoft Network service to customers. While this alone drew criticism, Microsoft's play for power did not stop at marketing its online service. When users installed Windows 95, their existing Internet access software was disabled, and an MSN icon would appear on the desktop. "The operating system for 85 percent of all personal computers is about to become an exclusionary marketing and distribution tool," remarked Steve Case, CEO of AOL (Gleick).
This plan failed, and MSN failed to capture the ISP market, but Microsoft continues to use Windows 95 to exercise control over content providers. With the channel guide Microsoft includes with Internet Explorer, users can subscribe to various sites listed and have information delivered to their desktops with "push" technology. In testimony before the Senate, Bill Gates reluctantly admitted that companies featured in Microsoft's channel guide are prohibited from promoting Netscape's products on pages pointed to in the guide (Meeks).
Besides controlling other industries, another effect of Microsoft's monopoly is lack of innovation. If Microsoft were to put Netscape out of business, as it has been trying desperately to do, any new browser features would be effectively dictated by Microsoft. With no competition, there would be no incentive to create new features.
Another effect of Microsoft's power is the coming of closed standards. "[Microsoft's] pattern, with increasing consistency, has been to refuse to cooperate with any standards procedures but its own" (Gleick). In an attempt to secure its Windows monopoly, Microsoft attempted to market its ActiveX technology to web site developers. Web sites adopting this technology would only be viewable from Windows. Fortunately, these attempts have been largely unsuccessful. Most web site developers, knowledgable of the platform-specific nature of ActiveX, opted for an open standard, Java, when creating web applets. Microsoft, uncomfortable with the open nature of Java, created a modified version which works only with Windows. Sun Microsystems, creator of Java, took Microsoft to court over this (Jones). The case has yet to go to trial.
One case of Microsoft's success at permeating closed standards is the Microsoft Word file format. Simson Garfinkel writes that users wishing to use a word processor other than Microsoft Word are often prevented from doing so because co-workers exchange Microsoft Word files. These files cannot be used in a competing word processor such as Word Perfect without losing formatting codes. Why? The structure of Word files is known only to Microsoft, so anyone wishing to view them can do so only through Microsoft products (Garfinkel).
Microsoft's exclusive control of the operating system market needs to be stopped because if it continues, consumer choice and quality of products will suffer. The assertion that consumer choice suffers is already evidenced in Dell's refusal to offer Netscape Navigator pre-installed with new systems. Even bigger evidence that free selection has been undermined lies in the fact that none of the biggest PC vendors will bundle any OS but Windows.
How can this problem of Microsoft's monopoly status be solved? When enough computer users become fed up with Microsoft's tactics, they will demand better. One thing that may cause people to view the company negatively is Microsoft's belligerent attitude in its dealings with the Justice Department. "Microsoft could find that even if it prevails over the government, it will have given the average consumer a reason to hate [Microsoft]" (Markoff, wk3).
What we need is a competing product to unseat Windows from its position as the only operating system choice. What would it take to defeat Windows? In order to answer that, it is necessary to understand why past efforts have failed. Macintosh failed because it was overpriced and closed architecture; Apple also discouraged independent development initially for fear of cannibalizing its own software sales. OS/2 failed because of IBM's own pathetic marketing strategy, which continues to this day.
The operating system capable of beating Windows has a unique ingredient not present in any past competition met by Microsoft. It does not come from a corporation. Corporations are too caught up in trying to beat Windows using Microsoft's rulebook. The OS to beat Windows is so outside Microsoft's paradigm that it can walk right into Bill Gate's backyard in plain sight, and he can still do nothing about it. Not only is it technically superior to Windows 95 in a multitude of areas, its multitasking is fully preemptive, the architecture is very stable, and it is far more configurable that Windows has ever been. This operating system is free. The operating system with a chance of knocking down the Microsoft monopoly is called Linux.
What is Linux? According to Linux Journal, "Linux is a multi-user, multi-tasking operating system that runs on many platforms" (Richardson, 4). Initially created by Linus Torvalds, a Finnish college student, in 1991, Linux has slowly infiltrated an estimated 5 million PCs, and continues to grow at an astonishing rate, and has received increased recognition after Netscape announced plans to release version five of its Navigator browser under similar terms (Crockett).
Linux is free, in every sense of the word. Linux can be copied freely without fear of SPA enforcers storming the premises. Linux can be modified freely without worry of lawyers knocking at the door with legal papers. Linux can be sold freely by anyone wanting to make a business of it, provided the seller passes the same rights on to customers ("Free Software").
The dynamic nature of the software industry which allowed Microsoft to rise could also be what turns it the other way. "Who would have thought even five years ago that a world-class operating system could coalesce as if by magic?" (Raymond). Red Hat's flavor of Linux even managed to win InfoWorld's OS of the year award in 1997 (Hammond).
Since the platform uses open standards and the source code is public, it does not suffer from the undocumented API which has plagued Windows. Third party developers of Windows applications such as Word Perfect and Lotus often charged that Microsoft had an unfair advantage when writing Windows software. Since Microsoft had control of the operating system development, they could place function calls into the operating system which were unknown to other developers. This gave Microsoft application programmers an unfair edge when creating software.
In contrast, Linux is completely open, and open standards have a history of coming out on top. JVC won the VCR market from Sony by making VHS an open standard (Brandt). The ISA bus standard won above IBM's MicroChannel architecture because hardware manufactures didn't want to mess with patent issues. The PC defeated Macintosh because IBM allowed clone makers to create compatible computers, while Apple attempted to prevent competitors from imitating its systems. By making the source code public, Linux developers insure that it remains open for all to use.
While Linux is the best solution to the Microsoft problem, other ideas abound. One alternative solution to the Microsoft problem is federal intervention. The Council for a Competitive Electronic Marketplace has formed for the purpose of lobbying against Microsoft in Washington (Birbaum, 135). Many people advocate placing restrictions on Microsoft's antics, but the most extreme solution proposed would be to break up Microsoft.
This is not an optimal solution. Unless Microsoft clearly breaks the law, intervention by Washington is the wrong approach, and should be avoided. The Justice Department's attempt to prevent Microsoft from distributing Internet Explorer with Windows is misguided. While the inquiry has revealed some of Microsoft's coercive manipulations, its aim at preventing web browser and operating system integration is counterproductive to software innovation. If Microsoft wants to sell a web browser OS, let it.
Gary Reback advocates requiring Microsoft to document API calls and hooks so that competing software makers will be able to perform on a level playing field with Microsoft (Brandt). An open API is a good idea, but as long as Microsoft owns the operating system market and creates applications, it is unrealistic to expect OS developers to share as much up-to-date information with the outside world as with co-workers. Even if all the API calls were revealed, the OS monopoly would still be in place. Since the entire Linux source code is open to everyone, all its internal details are available to any interested party.
The way to implement Linux as an alternative to Microsoft's operating system is for it to continue spreading and evolving as it has done since 1991. With developers who use it continuing to add features to their heart's content, the system becomes more powerful with time. Until recently, Linux was used almost exclusively by developers, and the philosophy surrounding it was, "Want a feature that isn't there? Add it." There is no sign that this kind of attitude will cease in the near future, so Linux continues to increase in strength.
While it is continuously evolving, Linux is not perfect. Before it can truly supplant Microsoft's domination of the end-user market, Linux still needs work to increase its ease of use. Among the many enthusiasts scattered about the Internet, programmers at Red Hat Advanced Development Laboratories are working feverishly on this very problem. Their mission: "To work with the Free software development community to develop a highly accessible graphical computing environment on Linux" ("Red Hat").
The other key element Linux needs for mass market success is support for Windows programs. Wine, an open-source windows emulator for Linux, has been under development for years. When Linux becomes fully backward-compatible with Windows, the deal will be too great for many Windows users to pass up. Linus Torvalds calls the Wine project "one of the most important Linux projects currently under development." He is right. When Wine works consistently with any Windows product, it could mean a death blow to Windows. When will it be finished? According to the Wine FAQ, 80-90% of Windows function calls used by major programs have been implemented, but the other 10% will take 90% of the time (Gardner). Slowly but surely, Windows support under Linux is coming.
Finally, in order to make Linux a practical success, it must be made available by hardware vendors selling new PCs. In an open letter to several of the largest OEMs, including Dell, Compaq, and Gateway, Ralph Nader and James Love requested that vendors allow customers the option of ordering an alternative OS such as Linux or BeOS pre-installed with new computers. "There is much talk about consumers having chosen Microsoft's OS, but if consumers can only buy computers with Windows pre-installed, competition clearly suffers" (Love).
The scenario of hardware vendors giving users a choice is unlikely to happen immediately because of Microsoft's firm fear-grip on OEMs, but consumer demand for Linux and other OSes is growing, and at some point the OEMs will have to comply with the new market forces or be replaced by smaller outfits which already bundle whatever OS the customer chooses.
Chromium Void makes the point that there would actually be many advantages for hardware vendors who choose to bundle Linux, including the fact that it's inexpensive, more secure, and could be configured remotely by the vendor should the need arise. Hardware dealers could also customize the desktop with a look-and-feel they choose for their patrons. For example, they could put their logo on the control panel, stick an icon on the desktop which would bring up the company's web page, or allow the user to contact customer support via a toolbar selection. Vendors would have far more control over what they sell than Microsoft currently allows with Windows 95 (Void).
Due to years of clever manipulation and slick business tactics, Microsoft has become a monopoly in the market of PC operating systems. The effects of this monopoly include an unfair advantage in other markets, loss of consumer choice, and more chances for Microsoft to abuse its power. The problem of Microsoft's monopoly on operating systems can be solved by the spread of a free, open-source OS, Linux, which will gradually erode the monopoly. In order to succeed on a wide scale, Linux must improve ease of use, Windows compatibility, and enlist the support of hardware vendors. Work in all of these areas is underway and continues to progress at a steady pace, foreshadowing the demise of Microsoft's exclusive control over operating systems for the future.
Bill Gates's dream of a computer for everyone, stated in an age when computers were rarely found outside of large institutions, was admirable as well as prophetic. The time has come for the instructions which operate those computers to find their way out of the monolithic confines of Redmond, and into the hands of the users.
32-bit: Can process information 32 bits at a time. Generally, more bits processed at a time mean faster computing, although it can also mean increased memory requirements. Older PCs running Windows 3.1 were 16-bit, while Windows 95 uses both 16-bit and 32-bit processing.
ActiveX: Standard created by Microsoft to allow authors of web applets to connect directly to Windows functionality and use the Windows interface in their designs.
API: Applications Programming Interface. The API is the set of routines through which programs access the operating environment. Every standard feature of the Windows graphical interface, such as buttons, pull-down menus, and dialog boxes are controlled through the API. "Undocumented API" refers to features which are kept a secret.
Channel: In the context of web browsing, a channel refers to a standard for delivering "push" media to a user's desktop. While traditional web browsing requires the user to actively access a web page whenever she requires data, a channel will automatically send her the data when the provider issues new data. Channels are commonly used to deliver news and stock quotes.
Chicago: Code name used during early development for what would later become Windows 95.
ISP: Internet Service Provider. Business which sells access to the Internet.
Java: Cross-platform development language created by Sun Microsystems. Programs created with Java can run on a wide variety of operating systems.
Memory Protected: An operating system with memory protection prevents buggy programs from writing to areas of memory they do not own. If an operating system does not feature memory protection, any program can crash the system. Hence, memory protection and stability go hand in hand. Operating systems without memory protection include DOS, Windows 3.1, Windows 95. Operating systems which do have memory protection include OS/2, Windows NT, BeOS, and Linux.
Object Oriented: A programming model centered around the use of objects. As entire volumes have been written on this subject, a detailed explanation is beyond the scope of this document. Object oriented programming allows software to more easily pattern itself after real-world concepts by encapsulating both data and procedural instructions into classes. This, along with related advancements, makes programs easier to understand and develop.
OEM: Original Equipment Manufacturer. Company which builds and sells computers to businesses and consumers.
Online Service: A company which charges members a fee in exchange for content, email, chat services, message boards, stock quotes, Internet access, or other forms of information. Online services are usually accessed with a modem, and are distinguished from Internet service providers in that they offer services and information not available to the rest of the Internet.
Operating System: Software that controls the operation of a computer and running of programs.
Preemptively Multitasked: An operating system which preemptively multitasks effectively controls the processor time slices given to each program, as opposed to a cooperatively multitasked operating system, which turns the processor over to the application in the hope that no program will not hog CPU time. Preemptive multitasking is generally considered superior because in a preemptively multitasking environment, a poorly written program cannot take control of the machine for long periods of time.
SPA: Software Publishers Association, formerly Software Piracy Association. Organization funded by the software industry which attempts to prevent illegal copying of software by helping law enforcement track down illegal distributors.
Web Applets: Programs which are run over the Internet from a web browser. They are usually used to perform a single, specific task, such as display an animation or control a menu.
Arquit, Kevin J. Cracking Down on Microsoft. [Online] Available http://www.ipmag.com/9801-1.html (Jan. 1998).
Birbaum, Jeffrey H. "D.C.'s Anti-Gates Lobby." Fortune 12 Jan 1998: 135.
Brandt, Richard L. Interview: Gary Reback. [Online] Available http://www.upside.com/texis/mvm/story?id=349ae5ee0 (December, 1997).
Crockett, Barton. A Titanic Challenge to Microsoft. [Online] Available http://www.msnbc.com/news139296.asp (Jan. 27, 1998).
Gardner, P. David. The Wine FAQ. [Online] Available http://home.pacbell.net/dagar/wine-content.html (March 1, 1998).
Garfinkel, Simson. Let My Data Go! [Online] Available http://www.hotwired.com/synapse/feature/98/01/garfinkel1a_text.html (Jan. 6, 1998).
Gleick, James. "Making Microsoft Safe for Capitalism." Antitrust Law and Economics Review Spring 1996: 71-96.
Goodin, Dan and Dawn Yoshitake. Foes take Microsoft to task. [Online] Available http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,19638,00.html (March 3, 1998).
Hammond, Eric. 1997 Product of the Year, Operating Systems. [Online] Available http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayTC.pl?/97poy.win3.htm (Nov. 24, 1997).
"Free Software Foundation." GNU General Public License. [Online] Available http://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/Linux/LICENSES/gpl.license (June 1991).
Jones, Chris. Sun Sues Microsoft, Alleges Java Pact Breach. [Online] Available http://www.wired.com/news/news/business/story/7499.html (Oct. 7, 1997).
Love, James. Nader/CPT Ask OEMs to Offer OS Alternatives. [Online] Available http://www.essential.org/listproc/info-policy-notes/msg00284.html (March 9, 1998).
Malloy, Amy. "Microsoft vs. Netscape" Computerworld Nov. 10, 1997: 75-76.
Markoff, John. "Not Exactly Micro. Definitely Not Soft." The New York Times Dec. 28, 1997, sec. 4: WK3, col 4.
Meeks, Brock N. "Gates Denies Monopolistic Charges." [Online] Available http://www.msnbc.com/news/147980.asp (March 3, 1998).
Nickell, Joe. "Forced or Not, PC-Makers Embrace Explorer." [Online] Available http://www.wired.com/news/news/business/story/9147.html (Dec. 12, 1997).
Raymond, Eric S. The Cathedral and the Bazaar. [Online] Available http://www.redhat.com/redhat/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar.html (Feb. 1998).
"Red Hat Advanced Development Laboratories." Goals. [Online] Available http://gnome.labs.redhat.com/what.shtml (Feb, 1998).
Reiswig, Lee. "Winner: OS/2, Version 2.0" PC Magazine Dec. 22, 1992: 111.
Richardson, Marjorie, ed. "What is Linux?" Linux Journal 40 (1997): 4, 16.
Torvalds, Linus. Re: attack on wine. [Online] Available http://www.ifi.uio.no/~dash/wine/formatmessage.cgi?3sbo32$d52@klaava.helsinki.fi (June 22, 1995).
Void, Chromium. A GNU/Linux New Desktop Hardware Proposal Why New Hardware Manufacturers Should Embrace GNU/Linux. [online] Available http://www.32bitsonline.com/Issues/mar98/caseforlinuxhardware.shtm (March 2, 1998).
Wallace, James, and Jim Erickson. Hard Drive: Bill Gates and the Making of the Microsoft Empire. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1992.