26846 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 86 / Friday, May 3, 2002 / Notices

MTC–00020179

From: Brian Summers

To: Microsoft ATR

Date: 1/24/02 1:52am

Subject: Microsoft Settlement

To whom it may concern,

I am writing in response to the proposed

settlement agreement with Microsoft in the

Anti-trust lawsuit. I want to express my

severe disappointment and outrage with the

proposed settlement agreement. This

agreement does nothing at all to Microsoft.

All it forces them to do is to follow current

law as it already is written. It does nothing

at all to remove all the power and influence

Microsoft has received by exercising its

illegal monopoly over the computer OS

industry. How can you even start to believe

that this settlement is fair for anyone outside

of Microsoft? You are basically giving them

a slap on the wrist, and saying, ‘‘Ok, we

caught you. Don’t do this again now. You can

go back to your business, but play by the

rules now.’’ This action is akin to catching

a major drug dealing ring, arresting them, and

then letting them go, as long as they promise

not to deal drugs again. And not only did you

let them go, you gave back all the drugs you

confiscated when you made the arrest as well

as all their drug money. Microsoft has a clear

unfair advantage over any other company in

the operating system industry. Microsoft

already received enough of the fruits of

illegally using its monopoly and has been

able to grow to what it is now because of this.

Something needs to be done in any

settlement that DIRECTLY AFFECTS

Microsoft’s assets and holdings, as well as its

power and influence over the OS industry.

These aspects of Microsoft grew out of the

direct result of them illegally using its power.

As such, anything that was gotten illegally

should be taken away, or at least an attempt

needs to be made to level the playing field

in the industry. This settlement falls very

short of what needs to be done do so.

One of the major flaws in the settlement is

that Open Source projects like the Linux

Operating System also should have access to

the communication and API protocols that

Microsoft’s OS’s use. Linux is currently the

MAIN competition that Microsoft is facing in

the OS industry. No allowing Microsoft’s

main competition access to the protocols

simply because the system is Open Source

makes no sense at all. Linux is the

competition and as such needs to have access

to the protocols as well.

Direct compensation needs to be made to

the consumers of Microsoft products. Prices

on their OS licenses have not changed at all.

Because there is no competition, there was

no reason for Microsoft to give a reasonable

price for their product, simply because

people had to use it.

The idea of letting Microsoft possibly make

compensation by purchasing computers and

software for some of the country’s poorest

school district does nothing but increase

Microsoft’s hold over the computer industry.

If any deal like this is made, Microsoft

should be forced to use the full amount of

money in any such action to purchase

computer hardware only. The cost of the

software to Microsoft would be nothing, if

Microsoft software was used. Because

Microsoft has the ability to make an infinite

number of licenses of their software, the

actual cost of that software to them is

nothing, and as such does nothing to hurt

Microsoft. All this type of deal would do is

create another generation of people to later

purchase a Microsoft product. Red Hat Linux

had an alternate proposal that I and many

others feel would be much more effective.

Red Hat proposed that Microsoft purchase

only hardware, and that Red Hat would

provide the software for the computers. Thus

allowing many more computers to be given

to more schools and also teaching people that

there is more then one choice for a computer

operating system. In closing, this proposed

settlement does NOTHING but allow

Microsoft to continue business as usual. We

had a better settlement deal BEFORE

Microsoft was found GUILTY then we have

with this settlement after their guilt was

PROVEN in court. This deal is completely

one sided and its side most certainly looks

like Microsoft to me. What do I as a member

of the computer industry get out of this?

What does everyone else who simply had to

pay outrageous prices for Microsoft products

get out of this? What does the computer

industry get out of this other then the fact

that Microsoft will still be as powerful as

ever? How does this do anything to change

the way things are? Well, if you ask me the

answer to all those questions above is

nothing. And that is what this settlement

does, its does nothing.

Brian Summers

Unix Network and System Administrator

Software Developer/Programer

MTC–00020180

From: Michael Newton

To: Microsoft ATR

Date: 1/24/02 1:52am

Subject: Microsoft Settlement

I am of the opinion that Microsoft is

actually *Winning* this case with the

settlement proposed. It is the equivalent of a

slapping a murderer on the wrist. And yes,

MS is very much a murderer. A suitable

punishment would be to force open all of

their API’s, an API is the code base used to

write the uppermost tier of executable

programs. The Win32 API, if open, would not

only embarrass the company (with their

feeble attempts at programming), but will

allow any number of windows programs to

run on alternative operating systems. There

is a project underway to create an API that

mimics the win32 API, called WINE, but life

would be soo much easier if the code-base

was already open. Another part of this is the

networking/communications APIs. MS

Outlook and MS Exchange Server have a

closed protocol. Opening this would pave the

way for alternative Office platforms, or

actually using MS Office on top of another

OS (Beos, Linux, Solaris).

Have you ever really read the Microsoft

licensing schemes? They had this one

scheme that flopped, not too long ago, that

had 3 options:

1) You don’t sign up for anything special.

MS then jacks up the costs of individual

liscenses.

2) You pay a yearly fee, and recieve MS

upgrades and liscences.

3) You pay a significantly reduced amount

if you promise to use ONLY MS products.

Everyone and their brother originally

bought MS products because they were

cheap, and because they managed to worm

into the OEM distribution channels. They

have become a defacto standard, even though

their OS is worth crap. Let us count the

number of security issues Windows XX has

had in the past 6 months, and the amount of

bandwidth that the entire internet lost

because of it. If the Gov’t doesn’t hold MS’s

hand while doing business, to ensure that it

is done fairly, I will have significantly less

confidence in every part of this country. I

swear... If you actually need something done

right, you can’t write to anyone any longer

because you will be ignored. How many

senators check their e-mail anymore? How

much thought will you (the reader) actually

give this letter, as well as the thousands of

other letters you recieve just like this one?

We actually need computer literate people

deciding on this case, and it is apparent that

we do not have that. In their stead, we have

a pile of lemmings that have been fed MS

gestapo propoganda. Yeah, ironically, I send

this via Outlook Express, on the only

windows machine I own. I have had to patch

this machine 20 times a month, compared to

the goose-egg off my two Linux machines.

Go figure.

Mike

MTC–00020181

From: RHS Linux User

To: Microsoft ATR

Date: 1/24/02 1:54am

Subject: Microsoft Settlement

I am a student at NOVA in Virginia. I feel

the proposed settlement in the anti-trust case

United States vs. Microsoft is severely

lacking in coverage and effective

enforcement. I suspect a symptom of

Microsoft’s tyranical behavior, and the lack

of restraint, is the flare up of Open Source

development. Perhaps this public movement

could be used to penalize Microsoft and

benefit the public at the same time?

Reguardless, I’ve seen Microsoft’s tactics over

the years, and the current settlement does

almost nothing to curb their behavior.

Microsoft will have completely evaded the

minimal restraints and enforcement within

five years and have lost none of its power to

elbow competition out in the short or long

run.

John Jones

MTC–00020182

From: Myles F. Barrett

To: Microsoft ATR

Date: 1/24/02 1:52am

Subject: Microsoft Settlement

The proposed Settlement is outrageously

deficient. The Microsoft anti-trust offense is

on a scale that boggles the mind. It will only

worsen as Microsoft adds new technological

sectors to its domination. Any sanction that

falls short of definitively preventing this

stranglehold from growing is a monumental

miscarriage of justice. Please make the

remedy definitive by breaking up Microsoft

into non-colluding units.

Myles Barrett

Software Consultant