Genuine competition would help Microsoft

I read "High-tech monopoly reasonable till better mousetrap invented" by Paul Krugman on the April 11 Post-Intelligencer Opinion Page. Krugman, a columnist for The New York Times, has somehow ignored the point of the government's case against Microsoft in his column justifying the company's monopoly.

His point appears to be that, first, because Microsoft has given us operating system standardization and, second, because he is able to use Netscape's browser and Word Perfect and, three, that they both work perfectly within Windows, so Microsoft is not abusing its monopoly. He continues, saying that Microsoft does not charge high prices or sell poor quality products and has not inflicted harm on consumers yet.

I think he misses the point of the government's case against Microsoft, which Krugman himself admits is a monopoly. I believe the government's case has more to do with the fact that Microsoft has done everything in its immense power to crush any threats to its operating system monopoly. He is correct in assuming that monopoly is not necessarily harmful. It becomes harmful only when the monopolist uses the power of monopoly to thwart potential competitors by non-competitive means. Instead of simply meeting its competitors head-on in the creative and technical ring, Microsoft tried to force them out of the market by fixing that market.

Microsoft was a relative newcomer to the Internet, yet when the company realized it was behind a rapidly moving power curve, it used its market influence rather than technical creativity to capture market share. Instead of building a better browser, Microsoft tried to get the existing Internet portals and computer manufacturers to deny Netscape entry. This is the same tactic Standard Oil used to try and dominate the oil markets at the turn of past century. It seems that the power inherent in monopoly is simply too intoxicating to resist.

As for Microsoft's quality, I have found the very opposite. I found Windows 3.1 to be an easy and powerful business tool and the Microsoft word processor and spread sheet programs easy and powerful to use. I never once experienced a computer crash with Windows 3.1.

However, when I upgraded to a newer and faster computer, I had to accept Windows 95 and preloaded Internet Explorer. I found Windows 95 to be maddeningly volatile -- it crashed numerous times every day. I found the new word processor to be very slow and full of bugs. I had to learn computing all over again to become even moderately efficient.

As for Internet Explorer, it was maddeningly slow. I tried to download Netscape but my system would not allow it. I finally e-mailed Netscape and the company explained the process through which I could enable my Windows system to accept its browser download. My Netscape browser is magnitudes faster in every way. That is not progress and it is not quality in my book. It is not creative competition. If I had a choice right now I would get rid of my Windows operating system and switch to something more stable and understandable.

Finally, Krugman is wrong to make it sound like the government's case is a personal vendetta against Bill Gates. That is the case only to the extent that Gates insists on these predatory tactics used by his company.

The case is about predatory market policies, not Bill Gates. Windows is little more than a knock-off of the Apple OS. Most of Microsoft's consumer software is built on the backs of the pioneer software manufacturers in each product category. This is not what I would call innovative, creative or technologically advanced. That is market plagiarism, and it is too bad the company's propaganda tries to convince us it is innovative and consumer-focused. If that were the case, why would Microsoft need to hire Ralph Reed of Christian Coalition fame to lobby for government favor? If it were true, I wouldn't be writing this essay.

Microsoft needs competition in operating systems very badly. Until it has serious competition, its software will continue to be little more than bloated, slow, volatile and overpriced copies of other's designs.

If each new generation of Windows were indeed an improvement over the previous version, I might agree with Krugman. Instead, I get to battle Windows 95 and a slow and buggy Microsoft office suite. Now is that any way for a benevolent monopolist to act?

Larry Dennison lives in Port Townsend.

OPINION HEADLINES
· School Finances: Down to the wire
· Seattle Streetcars: Catching a ride
· Detroit Bailout: The right strategy
· President-elect's jobs plan unclear
· Housing at risk in Seattle
· Hunger is a crisis we can solve
· Research says Summers may have been right
· Even Google searches for ways to cut back
· Bush pardons a bunch of hunters
· Will spending today hurt tomorrow's economy?
· Hillary Clinton could be a peacemaker
· Obama needs to bail out workers

more

SEATTLE BLOGS

Virtual Editorial Board
· Money for automakers, school funding and Seattle streetcars. Plus reader comments on viaduct
· Viaduct, Bush transition and more plus reader comments on Sound Transit, Justice Sanders
· King County elections; Recession, plus Higher education funding; Reader comments on depression

AP: TOP HEADLINES

· Automakers plead for aid, but Senate votes lacking
· Obama is delivering diversity, but some seek more
· Palin files late disclosure for free 2007 trips
· Bombs found in Mumbai train station a week later
· Police: Shackled Calif. boy jumped fence to escape

more

AP: ODD NEWS

· The one that didn't get away yields long-lost ring
· Customer spots cook butchering deer in pizzeria
· Want jail credit? Just clean up blood, vomit, etc.
· Fla. man accused of making boy drive on beer run
· Man uses candy cane to subdue attacker with knife

more