|
God knows I'm used to seeing the government doing weird, stupid things, things that violate all reason and run counter to common sense. But the federal antitrust suit against Microsoft is so far over the top, so moronic in its every detail, that I've been spurred to my own minor protest by erasing Netscape from my hard drive. The notion that Microsoft is so big and powerful that it constitutes a monopoly is ludicrous. The politicians in DOJ -- and let's face it, they're all politicians -- are pursuing Microsoft solely due to pressure from those in the industry, like Sun and Netscape, who feel threatened by Microsoft's expertise, marketing skill and wholly justifiable domination of the market, and have decided to run crying to Mama Reno for her to fight their battles for them. That's what antitrust actions all come down to. I love Teddy Roosevelt, but he opened a big can of worms with his trust-busting crusades which eventually led to the Sherman Act's wrongheaded intervention in the free market. The most famous such action in recent years was the phone company. We all loved to bitch about Ma Bell and her stranglehold on the market. And sure, some competition would be nice. But are you really happy with the way things turned out? Now I can choose among different long distance companies, but it's a false competition. The federal courts maintain a strict control over the rates being charged, keeping them artificially high across all the companies so that MCI and Sprint can stay in business. It's the classic "unintended consequences" of all government actions -- service has gone down, the rates are higher, and I'm plagued by fly-by-night services switching services without my knowledge. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, are you better off than you were fifteen years ago? Lord, no. DOJ's selective enforcement of these fuzzy, anti-market laws is revealing. When Office Depot and Staples proposed to merge in 1997, DOJ decided that they would control too much of the office supply market. (Never mind that most office supplies are sold by other than these two, and that together they account for only 37% of the market.) But then the same agency turns around and allows the merger of Boeing and McDonnell Douglas, the only two manufacturers of commercial jetliners in the country. Of the two decisions, of course, the Boeing one was correct. All of these firms enjoy a healthy market share not because of monopolistic intent, but the much more dangerous (to liberals) notion that they do a good job and provide value to their customers. It's a foreign concept to the Clinton Administration, but it seems to work in the real world. If DOJ and industry are really worried about Microsoft, they have chosen an odd vehicle to do so. They claim that Internet Explorer, if allowed to be bundled with Windows 98, would dominate the market. The odd thing is that of all types of software, Internet browsers are the one area where Microsoft doesn't dominate. (According to my site statistics, I get 55% of my visits from Netscape and 40% from IE.) How is Microsoft stifling competition? There are plenty of other operating systems out there besides Windows 98. So why aren't people buying them? Because they're crap. You need a masters in IT to get OS/2, Linux, SunOS, BSD and the others to run correctly. Apple continues to shoot themselves in the foot with their idiotic marketing. Only Windows is stupid enough for the masses. And, as always in a free market, the masses win. I was gratified by the appeals court's overturning of the browser injunction. Not only did they allow the bundling, they termed the DOJ action "odd" and stated that there was no way in hell that DOJ could prevail. I only wish they'd gone the extra mile and thrown Janet Reno in jail. I have few heroes in my life -- Winston Churchill, Thomas Jefferson, some astronauts. I've decided to add Bill Gates to the pantheon. I'm tired of government telling us that big business is the enemy, when in fact it's the other way around.
|
