The nine US states that want tougher remedies imposed on Microsoft
are attempting to weaken the software giant's desktop monopoly by
giving the Linux operating system something it can really use:
Office.
Microsoft's Office application has a market share as large as the
Windows operating system - more than 90% - and analysts have long
seen Office as one of the pillars supporting Windows' dominance.
"[Porting Office to Linux] would propel Linux on the desktop", said
Bill Claybrook, an analyst at Aberdeen Group. The absence of Office
"is the one thing that keeps me from using Linux as my desktop
machine", he added.
However, some end-users are not so sure that a Linux version of
Office would make a big impact.
"I think everybody in the world is probably looking for some
competitive desktop operating system, but I don't think that
anybody wants to switch," said Robert Hacker, a systems manager at
Binney & Smith, which manufactures Crayola crayons.
While Hacker said the idea of moving to Linux is intriguing, he
would have to see a "critical mass" of adoption before he considers
it.
One reason many companies might have trouble moving to a Linux
desktop is because of other Windows-based applications.
"We have lots of applications that are Windows-based," said Dan
Orr, an IT manager at Kokosing Construction. His company has about
700 desktops PCs, a quarter of which run other critical
Windows-based applications.
Moving only some desktops to Linux would increase costs, said Orr.
"I would have two different operating systems to maintain. That
would be tougher than maintaining just one," he said.
The remedy proposal, filed in a US District Court on 7 December, is
an alternative to the settlement reached by the Department of
Justice (DoJ) and half of the 18 US states originally
involved.
The dissenting states - California, Massachusetts, Connecticut,
Iowa, Florida, Kansas, Minnesota, West Virginia and Utah, plus the
District of Columbia - rejected the settlement and are continuing
the court case.
Other remedies sought by the states include requirements that
Microsoft make Internet Explorer open source and provide a
stripped-down version of its operating system free of middleware
products, such as media players and instant messaging tools.
Microsoft would also have to submit to the oversight of a "special
master", a court-appointed official with more power then the
three-member technical committee called for in the DoJ settlement
reached in November.
The states' proposal does include some of the same stipulations
called for in the earlier settlement, including provisions that
Microsoft fully disclose its operating system interfaces and set
uniform pricing for Windows with PC makers.
Microsoft already ports Office to Apple's Macintosh operating
system, and MIT management professor Michael Cusumano believes it
should be up to the company, not the government, to decide whether
Office is ever ported to Linux.
"If [porting to Linux] ends up being a losing proposition
economically, does the government end up reimbursing Microsoft?"
said Cusumano.
Citing Microsoft's decision to port to Macintosh, Cusumano added:
"If Microsoft thinks the application market is large enough and
profitable enough, they will port applications to that market.
[But] it should be a business decision, and I don't think the
business case is there yet."
David Smith, an analyst at Gartner, said the availability of Office
on the Mac platform has not spurred corporate adoption. "You've
already got Office on the Macintosh - has it really made the
Macintosh?" asked Smith. "I don't know of many corporations that
want to get rid of Microsoft."
Experts also see a problem with the states' proposal to require a
stripped-down version of Windows. "What features would you take
out?" asked Smith.