You probably remember this antitrust exhibit from Iowa:
http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/3000/PX03096.pdf
Herein, Microsoft describes its competition as a case of "Jihad" (holy war). It
turns out that there are roots for this in the past. The URLs may have
expired, but the Web Archive still has a copy.
Example #1:
Microsoft held out pretty long in not
accepting the tcp/ip networking protocol of the Internet. When the
Internet took off without them, they were simply forced to follow.
Such
a situation does not apply to java. Where tcp/ip was established and
supported by vendors of servers - that Microsoft couldn’t yet deplace -
java is a standard that is still to be developed and it doesn’t have
the protection of an already existing and difficult to remove
environment with very strong “network effects”.
Java cannot
replace Windows - so it is no competitor despite what the media tell
you. However, it could lift a major development platform out of
Microsoft’s control so that competiting operating systems can co-exist
with Windows. This co-existence would imply a commoditization of the OS
and thereby drive the prices down.
For this reason, to use their
own words, Microsoft sought to “undermine”, “piss on” and “steal” the
java language, just as they considered themselves to be engaged in a
“jihad” against Netscape.
The destruction of any form of
standards is a standing strategic rule in Redmond. Their market
position is their main weapon to further control the otherwise unarmed
software industry, and any court rule that has the effect of curbing
that power will be fought tooth and nail.
See: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,30023,00.html?st.ne.lh..ni
Example #2:
Allegedly CNET reporter used
confidential internal e-mail from Microsoft in his article “Microsoft’s
holy war against java”. Sufficient reason to receive a subpoena to hand
over the material. According to Microsoft Tom Pilla Microsoft
competitors are responsible for leaking confidential information in a
selective manner. Of course, Microsoft could have avoided the evils of
selection by not prohibiting the public from gaining knowledge of the
information.
See: http://www.salonmagazine.com/21st/log/
|
|
