The Microsoft Brute: With PR machinery as bad as Israel's, is the response a surprise?

The Microsoft Brute: With PR machinery as bad as Israel's, is the response a surprise?

The truth about Microsoft which every one knows - even the computer illiterate - is that the software giant has no one to blame for its tzuris but itself. Over-and-over again it has proven that to be so. In courtroom testimony, in statements by its leader Bill Gates, in television and newspaper advertisements, Microsoft has shown that notwithstanding the remarkably successful computer operating system which it produced, when it comes to public relations it can barely surpass the abysmal efforts of the Israel government. and that's no easy achievement.

Not that the company is innocent of wrongdoing. Having first used computers in 1970, and begun using PCs for business purposes in 1983, we have watched the rise of Microsoft and have seen it beat the competition. And then we have witnessed Microsoft pummel it, and grind it into dust.

Such conduct - rightfully characterized as that of a "predatory monopoly" by judge Thomas Penfield Jackson - is neither necessary nor beneficial. It calls for a remedy.

But the best response is not the recommended breakup of Microsoft which was put forward last month by the Justice Department and supported by many states.

The attorneys general of Illinois and Ohio had it right in dissenting from that tactic. Those two states, while not pulling any punches in their criticism of Microsoft, rightly argued that "strong conduct limitations and restrictions and affirmative requirements" ought to be tried, at least initially, and considered preferable to structural changes to the company.

The Justice Department's position that breaking up Microsoft will promote competition and benefit consumers remains unpersuasive; its determination to do so seems more an act of pique and justifiable annoyance than a positive solution to a brutish company's competitive tactics.