16 June 2000
Well known for his essays on OS/2
and today's computer market, Tom
Nadeau is an author as well as the webmaster of the OS/2Headquarters
website.
If you have a comment about the content
of this article, please feel free to vent in the OS/2 eZine discussion
forums.
|
|
Analysis: What the Microsoft Antitrust Verdict
Means
The expected verdict has been handed
down. The expected punishment has been mandated. Barring an unforeseen turn of events,
Microsoft will soon be split into two separate companies selling two separate but
related lines of software. What effect, if any, will this outcome have on the market
for the OS/2 Warp operating system and related products?
The easy answer is, "Nothing."
It appears that two or three years from now we will be able to walk into a computer
store and see what has changed.... Nothing. Every PC will still come preloaded with
Windows, at least on the retail front. Every application on the store shelves will
be Windows-only. A small area of the shelf space will be devoted to "alternative"
products such as Linux and maybe Netware or BeOS, but no OS-specific applications
for these platforms. There will not be any shelf space allocated to pure Java applications,
either, even though these would run on all platforms and theoretically have a larger
base of customers than Windows-only applications.
The only visible difference is that
there is now an area of shelf space devoted to a "new" company's products:
RemedySoft. RemedySoft Office for Windows, RemedySoft Browser for Office, RemedySoft
C++ for Office, RemedySoft Visual Basic for Office. Other than that, nothing will
be different.
Why would such a "momentous"
event as the breakup of the Microsoft monopoly have essentially zero effect on the
software marketplace? It has to do with the fact that the ultimate source of Microsoft's
monopoly power will apparently remain untouched by the court decision. That foundation
of control over the software industry is the OEM preload monopoly that Microsoft
will apparently maintain. With all the major PC vendors supplying almost exclusively
Windows PCs (and particularly in the retail channel), only savvy PC users who know
both WHY and HOW to remove Windows and upgrade to superior platforms will have that
choice.
Furthermore, Microsoft's control
of PC hardware OEMs does not merely include contractual preload obligations. Microsoft
hosts an annual industry convention called Windows Hardware Engineering Conference
or WinHEC. This meeting is designed to steer the PC makers into making their computer
hardware Microsoft-specific through the use of closed, proprietary standards that
Microsoft controls, as well as Windows-only hardware such as Winmodems. This way
it will be more expensive (and in some cases impossible) to make a PC that is preloaded
with Windows run the superior alternatives such as OS/2. We can expect Microsoft's
degree of manipulation of hardware standards to continue to marginalize the compatibility
of PC hardware with the non-Microsoft platforms.
Finally, we cannot realistically
expect Microsoft to freeze their design of Windows in its current configuration.
Instead, they will push toward a smaller, tighter kernel of OS code that is merely
a program-loader for Microsoft Office (soon to be known as "RemedySoft Office").
This new version of Windows will not perform anything except act as a "bridge"
between the PC hardware and MS Office. Office will itself become the new development
platform, with its own APIs and its own development tools. Every application that
is now designed to run on Windows will have to be redesigned to run on Office, the
new proprietary, industry-wide development platform.
Then, at last, Microsoft will be
able to use Windows for its true purpose: a *placeholder* that occupies the preload
space and prevents other OS's from being installed. By tightly focusing all its
energy on excluding other OS's and manipulating hardware standards, the new Microsoft
will be able to keep other OS's off of the preload market. And by tightly focusing
all its energy on steering software development away from "legacy" platforms
and onto the new RemedySoft Office platform, the newly-created RemedySoft will be
able to maintain control of the software development "barrier to entry".
RemedySoft will never write a product for Linux unless that product later requires
a so-called "upgrade" to the Office development platform, which of course
only runs on Windows.
This means that OS/2 will once again
be excluded from the preload set at most PC makers. Even IBM will be forced to write
two invoices -- one to Microsoft and one to RemedySoft -- in order to provide a
full-fledged PC platform. The only way to buy an OS/2 PC (outside of a few small
independent PC makers) will be to carefully select a set of compatible hardware,
buy OS/2, and load it up at home or the office.
As the old saying goes, "The
more things change, the more they remain the same." The only solution for quarantining
Microsoft would be to abolish preloads of Windows, which would guarantee that every
user of Windows bought and installed the product by choice instead of by default.
But this option was not even considered in the court case. What Mr. Gates predicted
is likely to come true: the antitrust case will be one big NOP -- a software instruction
that does nothing but consume processing cycles.
What does this outcome mean to OS/2
users? Basically, nothing. It means we keep using our preferred platform and enjoy
the benefits of being more informed than the average PC buyer. It means that we
continue to "stay the course" and not get too excited about the guilty
verdict. Guilt and rehabilitation are two very different things. Let's continue
to make OS/2 a better and better platform, and not pin our hopes on a sudden change
of mentality in Redmond.
|