Microsoft's Temper Tantrum as Strategic Delay
Microsoft despite it's size and maturity as a software company Microsoft is still capable of throwing quite a temper tantrum when it wants. While the change in administration from the Clinton Administration to the Bush administration in the United States meant that the anti-trust action by the Justice Department was quickly closed, in Europe the action is still on-going. And there Microsoft still continues to show it's ass, acting like a four year old forced to do something it doesn't want to do.
It's latest response just reflects poorly on the company. The EU wanted MS to DOCUMENT protocols and document various behaviors in the Microsoft operating system. Microsoft's response was to through the source code at the EU reps. They argued that the source code is the "ultimate documentation" and that the source code would be enough to allow their competitors to integrate with Windows to compete.
How do they know that? Well they queried various professionals and computer companies about the utility of the source code and they all agree it's enough. Of course Microsoft won't release the names of the companies or the professionals they cited.
Essentially Microsoft is saying,"We have discussed this with bunch of computer professionals and they all agree. The source code is enough."
The EU officials then asked,"Who are these people?"
To which Microsoft responded,"We cannot tell you."
It seems to me if you are going to quote an expert in a legal brief, people are going ask who that person is. To respond by claiming it's a trade secret is somewhat silly and very childish.
Look at the response to the documentation request. Microsoft responded to it by providing the source code, which ISN'T what the EU was asking for. They were asking for documentation in order to inter-operate with Windows various systems.
Microsoft dumped the source code as passive aggressive response. It's non responsive because source code (remember we are looking at 53,000,000 lines of code) doesn't actually respond to the request for DOCUMENTATION. This is an old corporate tactic called "Cover them with paper."
Microsoft knows anyone attempting to use the source code as a guide will spend more time attempting to decipher the source code than actually making a product to compete with Microsoft.
Keep in mind that the EU didn't ask for the source code. They asked for documentation of interfaces. In response to this Microsoft presented the Windows source code.
A set of documentation is more useful to developer seeking to develop a product for Microsoft Windows, especially a smaller development shop such as an open source development. The Windows source code is only truly useful for shops large enough to devote significant resources to it. By significant resources I mean more than a single individual - You will need a fairly good sized team (between 10-15 developers) solely devoted to making sense of the code.
In this regard providing the source code is an ideal response from Microsoft's perspective. It's a response that they can actually say is responsive (in a way) yet, it's not a response that open source developers can take advantage of in the same way that a set of clear documentation would be.
What I find almost amusing (if it wasn't so damn annoying) is why did Microsoft officials respond this way? The EU officials in Belgium don't change the way Washington changes. These bueaucrats aren't going anywhere. This particular delaying tactic only delays the eventual documentation that Microsoft is going to have to provide. The EU isn't the United States with a convienant election to completely shift the focus of the government.
Furthermore the EU is far too large a market for Microsoft to take it's ball and go home. Ballmer once actually threatened to do just that by leaving the European market. I suspect that MS is doing this because they are hoping that this will be enough and the Eueaucrats will leave them alone. The initial response however, that the Eueaucrats see the Microsoft ploy for just what it is a ploy and are likely to tag this response as a non-responsive.
It's also clear that MS understands the power of delay tactics. After the change of administration in 2001, MS quickly settled. They have continued to fight the EU for the past five years and will continue fight the EU until they have no choice. This means five-six years of preventing competitors actually launching products based the documentation that should have been provided years ago.
This strategic delay provides MS even more time to continue and extend their monopoly position in various software markets, increasing the barriers to entry for competition.
