/ 24 April 2002

Gates asks where Windows begins and middleware ends

PETER KAPLAN, Washington | Tuesday

MICROSOFT Chairman Bill Gates took the witness stand on Monday for the first time in his company’s epic antitrust case to warn that sanctions sought by nine states would set the Windows operating system back a decade, harming consumers and the computer industry.

Maintaining a smile that contrasted with unflattering video clips played at the original trial, Gates kept his cool under hours of questions from a states’ attorney who accused him of exaggerating any damage from the states’ proposals.

His written testimony lashed out at a key demand of the nine states for a version of the Windows operating system that can be customised by computer makers and rival software designers.

Gates warned US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly the states’ demands threatened Windows existence as a stable platform that allows a wide range of computer hardware and software to work together, and would deny Microsoft the incentive to make continual improvements.

”The (states) would undermine all three elements of Microsoft’s success, causing great damage to Microsoft, other companies that build upon Microsoft’s products, and the businesses and consumers that use PC software,” the world’s richest man said in his 155-page written submission.

The decision to put Gates on the witness stand marks a reversal from the original trial.

Some legal analysts have said Gates’ absence damaged the company’s defence. The US Justice Department, instead, showed portions of a videotaped pre-trial interview in which Gates, slouched in a chair, appeared uncooperative and quibbled over the meaning of common words.

”I hope that my testimony helps the court to resolve the issues in this case. That would be best for consumers and the industry and that’s why I’m here,” said Gates as he entered the court house on Monday accompanied by his wife Melinda.

TESTIMONY TO CONTINUE

Gates is Microsoft’s seventh defence witness. His testimony is scheduled to resume Tuesday morning and could stretch into Wednesday.

A federal appeals court in June upheld trial court findings that Microsoft illegally maintained its Windows monopoly in personal computer operating systems with tactics that included trying to crush Netscape’s Internet browser.

The nine states still pursuing the case have refused to sign on to a proposed settlement of the four-year-old case reached between Microsoft and the Justice Department in November.

The settlement is designed to give computer makers more freedom to feature rival software on the PCs they sell by, among other things, hiding some Windows add-on features.

But the hold-out states, led by California, say stronger measures are necessary to prevent Microsoft from abusing its Windows monopoly in the future, particularly against recent computer technologies like handheld devices and interactive television.

An attorney for the states on Monday tried to convince Kollar-Kotelly that Gates had twisted the meaning of their proposed sanctions in order to make them look extreme.

In a pre-hearing interview, Gates said a requirement that Microsoft tell competitors about new Windows features could chill cooperation between Microsoft employees.

If an application engineer comes up with a new feature for Windows, ”the minute it came into his brain, the guy’s in criminal contempt,” Gates was quoted as saying.

”You may think of it as an extreme example but I think it’s covered here,” Gates replied to states’ attorney Steve Kuney.

Later, Kuney took issue with Gates for asserting that the disclosure requirement would allow competitors to ”clone” the entire Windows operating system.

”It allows copying of virtually all of Windows,” Gates insisted.

KINDER, GENTLER

Armed with what seemed like an encyclopaedic memory of the states’ proposals, Gates battled politely with his questioners down to the tiniest points, at one point arguing over the word ”interoperate.”

After watching Gates on the stand, Howard University law professor Andrew Gavil said the Microsoft chairman had succeeded in presenting a ”kinder and gentler Bill than was present in the first trial.”

”But he’s still coming in quibbling over technicalities and he’s still avoiding answering some questions directly,” Gavil said.

In his written testimony submitted to Kollar-Kotelly, Gates credited Microsoft’s Windows monopoly with having helped to unite a fragmented personal computer industry.

”By reducing Windows to some undefined ‘core operating system’ the (states) would turn back the clock on Windows development by about 10 years and effectively freeze it there,” said the man who co-founded Microsoft 27 years ago.

The demands of the non-settling states are technically impossible, Gates said. And he dismissed the idea that Windows’ could function properly with add-on features, known as ”middleware,” that were easily added and removed.

”There is no clear dividing line between where a particular block of ”middleware” ends and the rest of the operating system begins,” Gates said.

Multiple variations of Windows would take too long to test and software developers would have to spend much of their time reconciling all the different operating systems rather than writing new software. Consumers also would have a hard time learning how to use the different versions, Gates said.

The states’ proposals would forbid Microsoft from even ordinary business practices, Gates said. They were also vague, self-contradictory and impossible to comply with them.

Disclosure of more of its computer code would give competitors free reign over Microsoft’s innovations and no incentive to improve its offerings.

”Within a few years, as competing platforms raced ahead by adding new capabilities, Windows would become obsolete,” Gates said. ”In short, the practical effect of the (states’ proposals) would be to cripple Microsoft as a technology company.”

Judge Kollar-Kotelly is weighing both the proposed settlement and the demands of the nine states. The hearings on sanctions are expected to go through May.

The nine states still pursuing the case are California, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Utah, West Virginia, plus the District of Columbia. – Reuters