Print - Go Founder Finally Gets Evidence He Needs to Sue Microsoft

Jerrold Kaplan wrote a well-regarded business book, "Startup: A Silicon Valley Adventure," about his experience creating and nurturing Go Computer in the late 1980's. And though the entrepreneur had always blamed Microsoft and its illegal business tactics for killing Go, it wasn't until a recent and unrelated court case that Kaplan found the one thing he had needed all along: Evidence. Now, Kaplan is suing the software giant, alleging that Microsoft prevented other companies from working with Go, effectively shutting Go out of the market.

Today, that's a familiar story. But in the early 1990's, information about Microsoft's dubious business practices was still vague and ill-defined. There was still bad blood from Microsoft's wresting of the PC operating system market away from Digital Research in the early 1980's. And of course there were rumors that Microsoft had engineered a certain MS-DOS version to break Lotus' popular 1-2-3 spreadsheet.

Most Microsoft complaints, however, had little to do with technology, and much to do with the way the company did business. The first federal inquiry into Microsoft's business practices started quietly in 1990, when the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) began investigating the way Microsoft sold Windows and other software. That investigation ended in 1993, when FTC commissioners deadlocked 2-2 on a vote to press charges. In that year, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) picked up where the FTC dropped off, however, and eventually secured a settlement from Microsoft in 1994 that ended numerous questionable business practices. Then Netscape and Sun Java entered the picture. The rest, as they say is history.

However, Kaplan's odyssey with Go occurred in the pre-Netscape, pre-Internet world, when Microsoft was still trying to secure Windows as the dominant operating system and Microsoft Office as the de facto standard for productivity software. At the time, companies such as Apple, Lotus, and WordPerfect still provided Microsoft will healthy competition, and if you believe the stories, this is when the software giant started exploring less honest ways of getting ahead.

Go Computer wasn't the first company to market a pen-based tablet computer, but it did offer the most successful design to date at the time, and the company had many supporters. Started in 1987, Go created a GUI-based OS called PenPoint that ran on an Intel 80286-based tablet computer. By the time the first PenPoint systems shipped in 1992, Go had upgraded the systems to an 80386 processor, and later versions used an AT&T processor after AT&T purchased the company.

Reacting to the excitement over Go's PenPoint system, Microsoft suddenly announced that it was working on an update to Windows called Windows for Pen Computing. Based on Windows 3.1 and spearheaded by Jeff Raikes, who now runs Microsoft's Office business, Windows for Pen Computing, like most tablet computer initiatives of the day, found little success. But it was most famous for being vaporware. According to complaints of the day, Microsoft had never even considered a pen-based version of Windows until Go announced its plans.

None of this is particularly nefarious. But evidence in a recent Microsoft legal case--a Minnesota class action suit that arose in the wake of the company's US antitrust case--allegedly proves that Microsoft illegally prodded Go's partners into abandoning the company, Kaplan says, dooming Go to failure. Chief among these partners was Intel Corporation, the microprocessor maker. Intel had planned to endorse Go's technology. But Intel, Kaplan says, decided not to endorse Go after repeated complaints from top Microsoft officials.

"I've made it clear that we view an Intel investment in Go as an anti-Microsoft move," then Microsoft CEO Bill Gates wrote in a message to then Intel CEO Andy Grove. "I am asking you not to make any investment in Go." Kaplan describes Microsoft's efforts to undermine Go as "a corporate mugging" and they certainly appear to be similar to tactics Microsoft used to keep Netscape and Sun Java off of PCs almost a decade later.

Kaplan learned about the evidence involving Go last year when he was subpoenaed in the Minnesota case. In April, he secured the rights to Go Computer--and thus the right to sue on Go's behalf--from AT&T spin-off Lucent Technologies. It should be an interesting case, assuming it ever goes to court. My guess is that Microsoft will settle with Kaplan, as it has so many times in the past.

"None of this is particularly nefarious." BULL**** Microsoft has repeatedly used its monopoly status to stifle competition and innovation. It's disgusting. You can be a monopoly, but you have to play fair. Microsoft never has, and never will

This article was G A R B A G E! Microsoft was a monopoly, and will be a monopoly forever. They ahve dominated the computer industry and will not let go. They know it in their hearts that they are stifling all competition and they know what they are doing is illegal. No more needed to be said.

The scary thing is that MSFT has always viewed the legal system as part of the "game". Illegal competitive practices are OK if the net present value (NPV) is positive - e.g. if you can suppress competition, you can afford to pay off some of the victims with the resulting monopoly revenue stream. MSFT has literally paid out billions over the years in this manner. They don't view any of this as unethical or wrong, simply "smart". (Who was it that said that evil never views itself as being evil?)

And so what is new? The rich get richer and the peope who try lose. When you have a billion dollars in assets and the courts will only slap a million dollar fine on you, what difference does it make? Why waste the hard drive space to publish garbage that will end the same as all the others? If Microsoft makes a billion and the courts slap them with a 5 billion dollar lawsuit, that would be worth publishing. . .

Was Microsoft a monopoly at the time? According to this article the late 80's to early 90's MS had "healthy competition". If MS was not a monopoly at the time, is this behavior ok? Eric

Bill Gates and Microsoft did what every red blooded American would do. Try to get an edge. I say dont punish them, if they play dirty play dirty back.

Every company tries to dominate. All successfull companies employ these tactics. Those who get caught, are made to pay. Most people wait for Microsoft to make a product big, before they come out of the blue to claim for damages. Why couldn't they do the hard work themselves in the first place! It is an american way of saying, well i am hurt, but if you give me some money i would be fine!!! Given an opportunity, people have done just the same thing. It is people who work in these companies, who change jobs within these companies. Don't treat employees of these companies seperate from the companies. And when employees also go hand in hand with these tactics, then , a general employee / user has no reason to look down upon MS.

Continuing on my post (#3) and in reply to post #6, Microsoft owns the internet, literally! They can ask any company to bend in they winds and lure them away from publishing the real truth. The fact of the matter is that ever since Steve Jobs left the intial partnership, Bill Gates has been building his empire (actually monopoly) on Jobs' hard work and has been taking advantage of a 'friendship'. So, the wind will blow the way MSFT wants it to. Don't any of you idiots realize the truth? You are just barking the way that MSFT has influenced the public. In reality, 90-92 % of all computers in the world are running Microsoft applications or OS's. If you do not call this a monopoly, the definition of monopoly needs to be revised. Thank You.

I agree with the previous post. I don't think Microsoft can be held liable for this because they weren't a monopoly back then, they were just another company trying to get the upper hand. Intel decided not to back Go, that's not Microsoft's fault.

I wonder where technology would be today had Microsoft played fair and not stifled so many small companies. Yes, some may be able to sue now, but will the restitution they collect from M$ really compare to what they may have realized had the Money Monger not taken them out? It's a shame that Microshaft has been found out, and still continues to practice. Seems to me that companies that have been found guilty of such underhandedness, that has continued for so long, should be shut down. Granted, it would really put a strain on our "standard" that has become, because of such unfairness, but it would allow others to step up and share the wealth. Billy isn't the only smart person out there, he's just one that knows how to make the system work for him.. illegally... His programmers know how to make a computer work..

Who cares if it's a monopoly. I like their software. Now, yes, it would be nice to have a choice, but Windows is fine for me. I pirate it all the time =P . And it's more easily customizable than, say, Mac.

MS is dominant. All of you haters would love to be Bill Gates, or part of the success he has created. wah wah wah all of the haters cry every time someone mentions Microsoft

You guys would do the same thing if you were in there shoes. If not then that is why your still a graphic designer.

TOTALLY AGREED with the last post, I've pirated MS products since I've got my first MS-DOS 6.22 to allow i386 to adress EMS and HMS memory to play AV8B Harrier Assault!! But I can say that if I could buy an OS like Mac, runnin' on x64 and just deploy 130 bills, I would, no questions asked. I think the real matter here is that Windows doesn't cost 250 bucks, being what it is, and doing what it does... an OS should of course be free, and then charge for the apps if you like it... (I've also pirated PS, ILUS, and AE, certainly... sorry?) And NEVER bought a legitimate copy of any software that wasn't bundled with something like a motherboard, or anything like that!!!. I JUST CAN'T HELP IT!!! If they were cheaper... maybe, but who could just LEARN to use an app like PS or AE without HAVING it? Trial versions just won't, don't bother with those!! Even if MS tries to build an uncopiable soft, they'll be doomed by Linux!!! Mac knows that and doesn't care, for their system is an hermetic package... so there's no one else to blame!!!

It's still the best system. That is, the business system of laws and competition that sometimes fosters this controversy. Remember, IBM created the PC and it first ran CPM and DR-DOS, not MS-DOS. If IBM had played their cards right, we would be complaining about them now instead of Microsoft. But what did IBM do? They botched up their opportunity! They underestimated the PC's potential, they overpriced their PCs, they irritated IT pros with their Microchannel Architecture and left the door wide open for companies like MS. Microsoft didn't win - the other companies lost - often stupidly. I'm sorry to tell you, it would probably be a bigger, more expensive mess had not MS grabbed their chance. Those who dream of shutting down MS don't know what they're asking. Around here, a LINUX tech costs significantly more than an MS tech. What more can I say?

I firmly believe Microsoft is in it's twilight. More and more people are realizing that Windows is so vastly insecure and too riddled with virus holes to be worth upgrading to and so are steadily seeking alternatives. With the increased availability and over all stability of Linux and now Apple's long over due move to Intel it's not hard to predict the beginning of the end of the Microsoft monopolistic and abusive empire. If you want to hasten this process and heighten the competition the plan of action is obvious - stop buying Microsoft products.

The Justice Dept has done their worst and Microsoft keeps on growing and keeps blocking true inovation and progress right? Why should Jerrold Kaplan care? He knows how to play the game, get an article written about how unfairly you have been treated, go to court and get your court settlement needed to buy your silence. Every smart inovator knows that is the way the game is played now. When are true congressional investigations going to bust this Microsoft mafia up? We need a Theodore Roosevelt to come around, maybe?

"The scary thing is that MSFT has always viewed the legal system as part of the "game"." So do the lawyers. It really sni't about what IS true, it is about what you prove or disprove--not necessarily related to actual fact. Doesn't everyone undestand that the LAW is just what you prove? Try suggesting that law be about proving innocence or crime by requiring honest statements to the court (e.g., if a lawyer knows his client is guilty, he must not say otherwise and should just work to advise the client on the sentencing phase of the trial), and everyone screams that that reduces everyone rights. Really? Maybe some privacy issues are affected. However, if you commit the crime, why should you have any privacy rights regarding the crime? Just a thought... Counsel

The disease starts at the top with Bill Gates. The corporation having no morality only mimicked it's founders. Had Microsoft come along in the 1990's Bill Gates would be wearing an ankle device instead of Martha Stewart. Places like Africa wouldn't have such a high debt if it weren't for Microsoft's price fixing. Because Microsoft has purchased and buried it's competition and stifled innovation on a global scale harming society and civilization as a whole it would be my dream to see Microsoft and Bill Gates tried for crimes against humanity.

It must be remembered that a company like Microsoft must be doing something right to be so successful. Its easy for computer geeks to sit around and complain about how inferior Microsoft products are, but Microsoft didn't become so large by simply making crap and brainwashing people. Obviously Intel decided not to go with GO computers because it did not see it as a good investment, or at least saw Microsoft as a better one, but yet again Microsoft is being sued by someone who lost and needs someone to blame. Unfortunately our justice system will most likely accommodate GO computer and one of the most successful American companies in history will be punished for being best.

So Jerry Kaplan blew himself up -- first with the demise of his early-stage start-up (Onsale); then with his buyout/merger of Egghead Software. With nothing left to do but get married & dumped by the 2nd wife (1st wife said "you're not only a loser, you admit it in your book"), he confessed to the NY Times that he went from "retired" to "unemployed" when his portfolio went south with the bubble burst. So now, with nothing better to do, and unable to get beyond his hard feelings about Microsoft, he's going to sue the bastards. Meanwhile, GO was morphed into EO -- a project that AT&T spent/lost hundreds of millions on. Fact is, Jerry, Pen Computing never materialized. So get over it, Pal, before you prove your 1st wife correct.

The subject that is pathetic it our representatives, all of which are for sale to the highest bidder. With this situation, nothing will ever be fair.

Microsoft has always seen court cases and fees as a cost of doing business. We know this to be a lot less cost prohibitive than actually creating a product that people WANT to use not just NEED to use. Frankly though Kaplan bought Go for a small sum knowing that he would be able to create a profit with the evidence he became familiar with in the Minn. case. This tactic is, well, just that, A tactic. A settlement will be reached that will make everyone happy and life will go on. Look for Longhorn in 2007 BTW.

"in the early 1990's, information about Microsoft's dubious business practices was still vague and ill-defined" To folks who weren't paying attention, maybe. Micro$haft's first major sale was an operating system it didn't own yet. After signing a contract for a ton of promises and hot air, it rushed out and acquired an inferior OS, slapped a label on it, and thus began the crippleware still known as DOS today. Then when the market started turning toward multi-tasking windowed systems, M$ essentially killed every competitor by announcing the imminent release of Windows, which would be far better and far cheaper. Everyone put their purchases on hold, the innovators went broke, and M$ took two years to deliver a steaming pile of manure. This was the origin of the term "vaporware". M$ has always been evil and their products are garbage 25 years behind the technology available today through free alternatives.

Calling Microsft software crap, will not and has not led anyone anywhere...MS only increases in domination numbers as years go by. The linux community is busy emulating Windows software so that they can feel great that they are using Linux!!! Anyways back to topic...MS has done what any capitalist economy company does...make tons of money and a name for itself. If you hate MS go use whatever you want to, but remember 94% of the computers (home, office, servers etc) use Microsoft software. Like all good stuff, the best survives as Windows has shown over and over and over again.

My goodness it took Kaplan so many years to realize that he had been ripped off by Microsoft!!! Good job Kaplan, you are realy a very smart man.

Linux community does not try to emulate Windows, not counting that MS stole "Windows" interface from the other. Linux is not the KDEs, Gnome, or whatever. It's fine that MS makes a lot of money, but trying to get others of the bussiness is illegal.

So how many posters here voted for conservatives in recent elections in the US. A vote for conservatives is a vote for monopoly.

Look at the big picture. These days, more now than ever, money talks. The US government has had MS on the chopping block before and they squirm away. The tobbaco companies was on the chopping block and they squirmed away. AMD is putting Intel on the chopping block... These big companies are using monopolistic dealings and they are probably being proven to a high degree but the government lets them off with a slap on the wrist. So it will continue... We need to put the government on the chopping block and watch them try to squirm away!

It is amazing the crap people can take. M$haft has been shafting people for years now, that people worry that they won't get shafted anymore. Quite a few of the pro M$haft comments were indicative. You repeat a lie.. It is like living on toppa sewer after some time the stench recedes into the background and if somebody points it out to ya, you say what stench ?

Face it there are perhaps 8% of the worlds users that hate Microsoft, and 8% that love it and another 84% that don't give a damn as long as it does what it says on the box. It is not MS fault they have done a better job than the others and moved up the market, whether fairly or unfairly, it is just a business. Trust me I know I have my own.

"A vote for conservatives is a vote for monopoly." I guess I was hung over the day the Clinton administration ordered Bill Gates to pay $10 in damages every time Windows crashed and wiped out someone's work, instantly eliminating his multi billion fortune of ill gotten gains.

What's the big deal? Microsoft asked a company they were in business with not to do business with another company. How is that illegal? It would be like telling your friends that you won't hang out with them if they hang out with a kid you don't like. waa-waa

"I guess I was hung over the day the Clinton administration ordered Bill Gates to pay $10 in damages every time Windows crashed and wiped out someone's work, instantly eliminating his multi billion fortune of ill gotten gains." LOL...with the frequency of that particular occurence, you need only charge $0.0001 per time to wipe out Gates' ill-gotten gains in a matter of hours.

Linux, Linux, Linux, whatever. Everyone talks about how insecure Windows is. No doubt it is and part of the reason you know it is that it has 90% of the market so hackers spend time exploiting it. If Linux ever gets a large market share folks will start hacking it. All and I mean all big companies abuse thier power. From IBM (just read what they did for Hitler in WWII) to ExxonMobil (ask the independent gas stations) they all crush innovation and stifle all who stand in thier way. Whose fault is it??-> Yours. You want cheap prices, high wages, and to work as little as possible. They are just giving you what you ask for.

"Is the flexibility of the Linux GUI a good thing? Yes and No. While advanced users can customize things to their liking, it makes things harder on new users for whom every Linux computer they encounter may look and act differently." -http://www.michaelhorowitz.com/Linux.vs.Windows.html The important thing here, in my opinion, is who determines to buy the OS software. Personal OS buyers tends to 'keep it safe' (which is ironic with malware & viruses) by buying something they know will work for them. This is especially important for gamers since it is rare to get new games released for Linux (M$ is a little more threatening then 'please don't release in linux -bill'). It is also not well known that Linux has essentially the same multimedia capabilities as windows, and also runs those programs more effeciently (this means better sound quality, less resources for same task, etc). On the business side of things it is usually the marketers selling the software. While a programer may realize that selling 911 Dispatch Software on windows is an actual safety issue a marketer simply cares about what will sound good to the client. "If Linux ever gets a large market share folks will start hacking it." Linux/Unix does have a large market share as servers (web, dns, etc). The reason people use *nix for servers is because it's much more secure and stable then windows. One reason it is more secure and stable is because the source code is open to thousands of programmers who review it to ensure it remains such.

Don't make a fuss, just get on the MSFT bus. This is just one more case of a poorly run, ill-timed company now trying to recoup it's losses using the antitrust decision against MSFT for ammo. It's a shame our legal system works this way. MSFT was just competing like any other software company back then. They did nothing wrong. They just happened to win, and are now paying for their success.

"You can be a monopoly, but you have to play fair. Microsoft never has, and never will " Um where have you been for the past 200 years? Since when did a monopoly ever play fair? let me you in on a secret when it comes down to tech conpanies. buiness first. technology second. The goal of any company is profit.

The reason many people go with M$ is because of all the products out there. Who wants to be limited in a selection of products when so many other companies have benefited from one mans monopoly. If someone invented a way to have a DirectX emulator on linux then im sure you would see a lot more games and other software move over to be side by side compatable. But because M$ has the monopoly it does it has pushed competers that allow games and other applications to run on multiple platforms out of the way (Ex. OpenGL) windows hardly supports openGL yet its multiplatform and was a hot topic a number of years ago. so what if Go went out of business as so many others did. They could have shifted there software to work with windows and eventually into the market as its own. Lindows came and went out of noware. Linux is here to stay becuase of the Open source and free community that supports it. And Mac's. future is unknown but can we blame microsoft for that to? After they have held in for many many years.

I liked the fact that the system MS developed was vapourware and they used corporate bullying to push these guys out of the market. Look at Wal-Mart, do you think they care about the Mom and Pop shop. Its guys like Intel that love to get into bed with companies like MS, look at what it did for them. Unethical, maybe but companies are in business to make money, as the shareholders want to see their investments grow. That is the sad assed truth. Sometimes the little guy gets creamed, but from what is in the article, the tablet computing initiative was weak then anyway. Live life and move on and dont look for some loophole to capitalize. Build a better product, sell it and make money that way.

not to change the topic but I am a playstation fan (sony) when the suppost to be more powerfull x box came out every body thoug that it was going to be the most selling gaming hardware but well... sony stood for over as much twice selling the ps and still is the leader I think is like some other guys say make something better and don`t use your monopoly power and you got the results

Wait, let me get this straight- This company folded because of something Intel did on their own free will, so now this guy who somehow got rights to the company and now decieds to sue MS for a decision Intel made? Microsoft wasnt even a monopoly back then. I dont see John DeLorean sueing General Motors or Ford because the DeLorean failed, why cant this guy just get over the fact that his idea was good but his timing sucked and move on like the rest of us would.

What bothers me more than the practices of MS is what some of the people on here feel about the issue. Some of you are saying that MS is practicing illegal means of taking over a market, but that's okay because "you would do the same" or, "they're just doing what all big companies do." When big corporations get caught doing dirty things to get on top, they should be punished. End of story. You don't just dissmiss it as, "that's the American way." What a bunch of crap. I don't think Enron should walk scot free, and I feel that way about all big businesses who get caught cheating the system. Especially when it's ultimately affecting people like me, the average american consumer. Best part about your article Paul was: "But evidence in a recent Microsoft legal case--a Minnesota class action suit that arose in the wake of the company's US antitrust case--allegedly proves that Microsoft illegally prodded Go's partners into abandoning the company, Kaplan says, dooming Go to failure. Chief among these partners was Intel Corporation, the microprocessor maker. Intel had planned to endorse Go's technology. But Intel, Kaplan says, decided not to endorse Go after repeated complaints from top Microsoft officials." I didn't know that Intel was interested in Go, that's interesting. If it was MS's plans to keep Intel all to themselves, I wonder how the guys at Redmond feel about MacTel right now? I'll be looking into double checking this info with other sources as well. -Derek Traver

What so many of you techheads don't realize (those of you who keep calling Microsoft products garbage) is that the key to success in business is giving the customer what they want, not what you think they need. Microsoft gives a easy to use and user friendly GUI on top of it's OS. That's what the customer wants!!! The customer is not us, it's the end users. As long as they keep releasing "ok" products with cool looking and user friendly GUI's they will stay at the top. In the days when computers were still for the very hi-tech individuals and careers, the others had their chance to excel past MS (unix,linux, and apple come to mind) but guess what? They didn't. As far as the lawsuit goes, don't Microsoft is the only one who does this. If you do a little research you will find that there are many cases similar to this one filed against Apple all the time. They are usually small software companies, and the disputes are usually settled out of court. And for those of you who continue to rant about IE and how much better Firefox is, I've got news for ya. There's plenty of 0day already out there for Firefox (and some of it is really good stuff). When the $hit hits the fan and some of the more critical Firefox exploits become more well known, whadda ya think is gonna happen? Do you think Firefox/Mozilla have to resources to pump out patches at the rate and quanity Microsoft does? Remember, always look at the big picture. Keatron

And personally, in my opinion, what Enron did was way worse than anything Microsoft has ever done. They basically mislead and lied to people about many things in order to appear to be making more money than they were. The worst part is they spent a lot of money that was essentially the 401k of thousands of employees. Imagine it's two weeks until you retire from a company you've worked for 35 or 40 years, then you get the news that the 2 million bucks you thought you had in your 401k was gone. That can't even be compared to anything Microsoft has ever done.

Past GO , do not collect £200 Im the silver IRON I will give you Liverpool ST station for £100

@keatron28 "the key to success in business is giving the customer what they want," Yeah. Or having enough market power and control to prevent that customers start using alternatives (which is what this story is all about). "The customer is not us, it's the end users." So you don't buy MS products? Are the hoards of "end users" in companies, having to use an MS system because some SysAdmins or Manager decided so the customers? "cool looking and user friendly GUI's" You must be jocking. I know plenty of "end users" (who can't decide which OS they have to use at work) which would happily ditch MS's entire product line. "many cases similar to this one filed against Apple" As long as you don't provide examples, this is pure FUD. You'd better have a look at this: http://usvms.gpo.gov/findfact.html "Do you think Firefox/Mozilla have to resources to pump out patches at the rate and quanity Microsoft does?" More FUD. Just because MS has more ressources, it doesn't mean they produce better software are fix problems faster. And since FF is not tied to the OS, they will hardly have the same amount of problems. Some of the past security vulnerabilties in FF such as the shell scripting exploit where FF on Windows only problems (which says tons about the security of Windows). And up till now, the FF team was way faster with security patches. "always look at the big picture." Agree. And there I see a monopoly OS vendor which has everything to lose and therefore does everything to use it's market power to prevent competition and get monopolies in other markets which damages customers. Hell, Billy Gates got all the money from people like you. How much does it cost to produce and support something like Windows. Less then 50 bucks. How much do you pay for server licences, seat licences, support.. So why do you need to defend MS? The got plenty of your money, so they should be able to defend themselves.. If a OS vendor who happens

I don’t see what the big deal is. Microsoft made it. Others didn’t. End of story. Doesn’t matter how they did it. I personally see all these past issues and current monopoly laws as garbage. Because a company makes it big and in turn gains power. Good for them. If it was Apple. Everyone would be on there case. This Country thrives on lawsuits and drama. Doesn’t anyone work anymore? P.S. Legit Xp pro user. And Office 2k3 to spell check

I'm astonished by theses posts ! So if a gangster rule the city, then well, it's okay, the mayor had to been smarter, now the boss is mafia, period ! Maybe this explain why everybody accept a president that stole his job... No wonder why americans are so hatred around the world... you foolish egoist that knee down in front of desperados...

"Maybe this explain why everybody accept a president that stole his job..." No I don't accept this but if I say anything I would get trown in prison and called a terrorist. It is just a small group of people, the neocons, that painted a bullseye on every american's back.

All of this makes me think of a movie, “anti trust”. A big shot CEO steal everyone’s code to make him grow bigger. Microsoft is doing the same thing. Instead of making application themselves, they make contest to make others do the application. Here are 2 examples: msdn.microsoft.com/mobility/ windowsmobile/partners/mobile2market/ contest/default.aspx www.doesyourappthinkinink.com/ Giving to the winner a little amount of money, while they could make millions out of it.

Primary Microsoft strategy: Make a lot of hot air about non-existent products, optionally sue if that fails, then make verbal threats at 2 a.m., if that fails, try to bribe...er, "settle" during any lawsuit. Looks like Go is on its last legs as a company (only companies that are dying sue other companies) and Microsoft will bend a little just to get them out of its hair.

Amazing we blame Microsoft for being a monopoly, but yet we have other companies that do the same thing & I don’t see anyone going after them. I call it healthy competition everyone has a choice, besides that, if other people would make there software with the user in mind, maybe Microsoft would not be the giant it is today. I say leave them alone.

How is writing a letter to the CEO of Intel asking him not to invest illegal. Esp because Bill Gates is probably a stock holder in Intel. This is the most rediculious thing I have ever read.

I may not agree with everything that Microsoft though, but look where the company came from. It's just like every business, someone creates a product, someone else wants to make a better product. Who cares that Microsoft got the "idea" for Windows from Apple. Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer, well, all I can say is that I may not like them, I may not like how they do business, but I still respect them. It's their company, let them run it how they want to. If you don't like it...Their's plenty of other Operating Systems, Applications, etc..Go get one of them.

I just love reading that the American Way is to be amoral, unethical and greedy. Because, if you read some comments above, that's exactly what is being said. With patriots like that, who needs foreign foes? Mr Gates is such a wonderful role model - think of this when your boss fires you to hire someone younger at a lower salary, and your landlord evicts you to make big bucks with a condo conversion, and you get run out of town for vagrancy right after the City bulldozes whatever remnants of assets your garbage bag was holding...

"Who cares that Microsoft got the "idea" for Windows from Apple. " No - They did NOT "get the idea" from Apple. They REVERSED ENGINEERED the MacOS. If you are unable to perceive the subtle difference... That's very scary - yet not quitet as scary as some of what other people are saying here. Some of the posters would have been quite happy in Germany, circa 1930's ... Darn. Now I won't sleep for a week.