Users hope settlement returns Microsoft's focus to enterprise
 
|
|||
 | |||
|
While Microsoft's antitrust case may set a precedent in legal circles, for IT executives the 3-year-old case is seen as more of an impediment to solving more enterprise-focused issues.
On Friday, Microsoft and the Department of Justice submitted a proposed settlement, or Final Judgment, in the case to U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly.
IT executives say any conclusion to the antitrust case, either negotiated with the Justice Department or litigated in the courts, will have little impact on them and they would like to see a swift end that would allow Microsoft's undivided attention to enterprise issues.
"The licensing decisions Microsoft has made recently have had a far more negative impact than anything the Justice Department could do to them," says Joshua Canary, infrastructure engagement manager for Collective Technologies, a systems integrator.
For the past five months, Microsoft has been buried under an avalanche of customer outrage based on recent licensing changes for enterprise software. Several research firms have shown that software-licensing costs could increase by as much as 100% for some enterprises and Microsoft has twice altered details of the plan since May.
"If this [case] has been diverting attention away from work on licensing, Windows XP or Windows 2000, then the benefit for the enterprise will be to see the case end," Canary says.
The most hotly debated provision of the settlement, according to sources, was one that requires Microsoft to submit source code for review if compliance issues arise. Microsoft has said all along that it would fight to protect its intellectual property.
But some say results of a proposed settlement, including opening up Windows source code for review, also have little appeal.
"In the grand scheme of things, whatever is settled at this point doesn't seem to affect us directly," says Ken Winell, president and CEO of Econium, which develops XML-based enterprise applications based on either Microsoft .Net or Java/J2EE technology. Winell also said Microsoft's biggest challenge is to develop a decent licensing agreement for the enterprise, including one based on offering software on a subscription basis. "Right now they have nothing in that area." But Winell also is concerned that this case is not over yet.
"I think there are some self-serving state attorneys general who want to impose their will on this case for harsher penalties," he says.
The 18 states that are a party to the antitrust suit have not agreed to the settlement and will have a hearing on Nov. 6 to ask for more time to draft a reply, according to Bob Brammer, a spokesman for Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller.
Microsoft and the Justice Department reached their settlement in the case after three weeks of talks. Microsoft's Chief Software Architect Bill Gates said in a statement, "resolving this case now is the right thing to do." He said the settlement would enable Microsoft to focus on the future, which appears to be what enterprises want to hear.
The settlement calls for a 5-year consent decree that would establish an industry panel to review Microsoft's conduct with PC manufacturers and software rivals.
Microsoft skirted around another consent decree it signed in 1994, which led to the current antitrust case. That bit of history makes some weary of a repeat of that fiasco.
"In fishing parlance, this sounds like a catch and release," Enlightened Point Consulting Group President John Kretz says. "Microsoft has proven they will only sign a consent decree after their lawyers have found all the loopholes. I get the sense that the feds are caving. I think there is just cause to looking further at this case, especially based on the bundling done with Windows XP."
If the settlement fails, Judge Kollar-Kotelly will oversee the remedy phase of the case, which would begin in March 2002.
The IDG news service contributed to this report.
Related Links
