Bill Gates and Microsoft

After Gates graduated high school, with a perfect 800 on the SAT, he went to Harvard law school in 1973 (“Gates, Bill” 2) (“Gates, William Henry, III” 1). In 1975 his friend Paul Allen came up to him while Bill was in college and showed him a Popular Mechanics article about a $350 microcomputer, Gates read this article and was convinced that he wanted to be in the computer industry (“Gates, William Henry, III” 1). As a sophomore in college he and Paul Allen made the computer language BASIC compatible to microcomputers, this took much skill and he was the first to do it (Leaders of info 2). He did this for a company called MITS (Leaders of info 2). This shows his motivation to do well in the world, and to be successful. With this new success in the BASIC software, he dropped out of Harvard and went to pursue his new career (“Gates, Bill 1). He went to Albuquerque, New Mexico with Paul and they both founded a new company called Microsoft to mass produce their new software (Leaders of Info 2).

Bill Gates and his company prosecuted many individuals and companies for software theft to show the world that intellectual property cannot be stolen without punishment. In 1998 Gates noticed that there was a huge gap between the number of computers being sold each year and the number of computer software. He quickly realized that many people were stealing computer software online. Gates knew that using computer software without paying was illegal and he intended to make everyone that stole their software pay the price for their crime. When Microsoft first discovered that their software was being stolen they decided that if people were going to steal software then they should steal Microsoft’s software and eventually Gates would find a way to collect money from his stolen property. Microsoft went after over 80 companies that they discovered were using their computer software without purchasing it and they pressed legal action and in the end got the money they had earned (Down to Earth). Before Microsoft prosecuted these companies for illegally downloading software, stealing intellectual property online was not considered important and legal action was almost never taken against those who committed the theft. Thanks to Bill Gates and his company intellectual theft is now taken

According to the Department of Justice, Microsoft used its resources and technology to drive other companies out of business, thereby eliminating the competition and creating a monopoly. Without competition, Microsoft was able to set prices and consumer conditions in a way that exceedingly benefited the company while ensuring a decreased amount of new competition because of the proprietary software installed in most PCs. (Competitive Processes, Anticompetitive Practices and Consumer Harm in the Software

Microsoft has developed into an inescapable force within the technological field. Coming from a delayed humble beginning, it has had to devote large sums of money to approach the levels of the founding technological companies. Today, Microsoft controls the market in computer software. How they have achieved this status is what some have come to question. Through “bundling” software programs, manipulating other computer companies, and packaging deals with personal computers, Microsoft has managed to eradicate nearly all competitors in the computer software market (Love, 1997). This near monopoly affects the entire spectrum of classes, including the consumer, other networking providers,

Netscape and Sun Microsystems pressured the Department of Justice for action. Other competitor's felt Microsoft used "predatory and anti-competitive conduct" to impede other platform threats, thereby further entrenching its operating system monopoly. The Department of Justice continued its investigations and actively pursued investigations into the alleged monopolistic activities of Microsoft. During the course of the investigation, Microsoft and the Department of Justice continued to negotiate a new consent decree. After eighteen unsuccessful drafts, the Department of Justice, in conjunction with twenty state

A recurring point in Gilbert's studies included the notion that people were utterly incapable of making predictions that would lead to their actual optimal happiness. A study showed "that about nine out of ten people expect to feel more regret when they foolishly switch stocks than when they foolishly fail to switch stocks", but the study also showed that those "nine out of ten people are wrong" in assuming that expectation (Gilbert 135). A majority of consumers also made an incorrect assumption, as described by Stiglitz, which resulted in the maintenance and growth of one of the most well known monopolies of the present. The consumers assumed that, due to it's "near-monopoly on PC operating systems," Microsoft was a good and innovative company and is capable in handling computer systems. This was not the case when it came to "alternative technologies" such as the "development of the Internet and the web browser" because their competitor, Netscape, was "building on government-funded research" while Microsoft had no such incentive (Stiglitz 405). Microsoft then decided to launch their Internet Explorer, but by itself Internet Explorer could not compete against Netscape. They knew this, and so "decided to use its monopoly power in PC operating systems to make sure that the playing field was not level." They offered Internet Explorer for

The government, for example, contends that some of Microsoft's business agreements with Internet service providers and Internet content providers, which restrict their ability to promote non-Microsoft browsers, violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act. The government also alleges that Microsoft has violated Section 2 by engaging in anti-competitive actions to preserve its Windows monopoly and to extend that monopoly into the browser market (2).

America's century-old antitrust law is increasingly irrelevant to our current worldwide information technology market. This law is outdated, in accordance to the modern Microsoft situation, because in the past there wasn't technology as there is now. Recently the government has been accusing Microsoft as being a monopoly. "Techno-Optimists" claim that "efforts by government to promote competition by restraining high-tech firms that acquire market power will only stifle competition." Some analysts disagree. They concede that dynamic technology makes it tough to sustain market power. Still, consumers will want compatible equipment, which will lead them to buy whatever product other consumers are using,

“All of these qualities were evident in Gates’s nimble response to the sudden public interest in the Internet. Beginning in 1995 and 1996, Gates feverishly refocused Microsoft on the development of consumer and enterprise software solutions for the Internet, developed the Windows CE operating system platform for networking non computer devices such as home televisions and personal digital assistants, created the Microsoft Network to compete with America Online and other Internet providers, and through Gates’s company Corbis, acquired the huge Bett mann photo archives and other collections for use in electronic distribution.

Commencing in 1990, Microsoft was investigated and then charged with violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act which governs United States businesses. The company was determined to be a monopoly, and one which used anti-competitive practices to keep its leading edge on the market. As would most any organization on the receiving end of the allegations, Microsoft did not agree with the charges and sought to defend its business

The case against Microsoft was brought buy the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as several state Attorneys General. Microsoft is accused of using and maintaining monopoly power to gain an unfair advantage in the market. The case has been under observation for a long time, but the Justice department is having trouble coming up with substantial evidence against Microsoft. Specifically, the Department must prove:That Microsoft has monopoly power and is using it to gain unfair leverage in the market.And that Microsoft has maintained this monopoly power through "exclusionary" or "predatory" acts(Rule).Some say that Microsoft is only taking advantage of its position in the market and using innovative marketing strategies

Introduction This case study is about the antitrust case of Microsoft’s business practice around its Internet Explorer product. In this case study, the background of the case is discussed, followed by a discussion on whether Microsoft was abusing its monopolistic power in trying to win over its competition, and whether Microsoft was anti-competitive as alleged by people who opposes the company. In addition, the case also relates to how consumers are impacted by Microsoft’s business practices, and how the intervention of legal system has influenced the software market. Analysis Background of the Case

Mr. Gates’ also explains how Microsoft tackled the challenge of integrating the Internet to be compatible with various Microsoft products. The biggest dilemmas were determining what should be incorporated into the existing Microsoft products, what should be packaged as new products, and how should the Windows Operating System support the Internet. He gives frequent examples of how the other competing computer industry giants were able to succeed in the computer industry. A lot of success he points out was made through trial and error as well as learning from one’s mistakes. He talks about how Microsoft has learned from projects that have failed such as the Multiplan spreadsheet that went on to be developed into Microsoft Excel, and the Omega database that would become Microsoft Access. One suggestion that Mr. Gates makes in achieving company success is by

Later, US Justice Department filed antitrust charges in 1998 against the software company, claiming that Microsoft had taken over the internet browser competition and limited consumer choice. In view of antitrust regulation in the US and EU, and increasing competition in the desktop software market, Microsoft was determined to move beyond the PC software industry. By formally recognizing the emerging business opportunities introduced by the new internet era (“Web 2.0”), Microsoft began to reinvent itself. It wanted to extend its software products into web-based services for businesses and consumers. It wanted to try new sectors such as media, television set top boxes, game consoles and other broader technology services. Microsoft aimed to transform itself and wanted to set a standard for accessing, communicating and doing business over the internet.

Microsoft has a long history of engaging in monopolistic behavior, from the initial efforts to protect their operating system business to the forced bundling of key software components including Internet Explorer (Meese, 1999). The goals of this analysis include a critical evaluation of why Microsoft has been investigated for antitrust violations, an assessment of how they are trying to gain monopolistic strength in the computer software industry, in addition to an assessment of the good and bad aspects of monopolies in general.