09.20.09

Gemini version available ♊︎

Microsoft Compares Its Monopoly to the Older Telephone Monopoly

Posted in Antitrust, Bill Gates, Microsoft at 10:04 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Old phone

Summary: Political acceptance using the company’s image — a debate from within Microsoft

TODAY’s Comes vs Microsoft exhibit is Exhibit px09509 (1991) [PDF], which we already have in the Wiki. It shows just to what degree Microsoft perceives itself as a political movement.

This document is titled “Managing the Microsoft Image for Public and Political Acceptance”. Mike Hall and Bill Gates were sent this by Richard B, whose surname we were unable to determine. Here is the opening paragraph:

The position of Microsoft in the market has grown rapidly; today, it has an impact on the economy, the information infrastructure of business, and the public that is reminiscent of the situation of AT&T in the early nineteen hundreds when telephones had been widely accepted, but not yet become ubiquitous.

This happens to relate to this week’s news. In news of interest, here is Microsoft recruiting people along with oil giant Exxon on campus. Microsoft’s co-founder has also just given more wireless control to AT&T, whose many offences we wrote about here.

Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen has made a deal with AT&T to sell the carrier several licenses for wireless spectrum in the Pacific Northwest, according to Bloomberg. The deal was exposed in government documents, although the agreed price has not been disclosed by either party.

Anyway, Richard carries on by stating:

Peter Drucker has written an account if how AT&T recognized the implications of its position at the time, and how it responded successfully. I would like to recount that story and then suggest how Microsoft’s situation is similar, and how it can and should apply the lessons of our predecessor in order to be equally successful for the long term (25 to 50 years).

“One of the earliest and most answers (to the question ‘what is our business’) was worked out by Theodore N. Vail (1845 – 1920) for the American Telephone and Telegraph Company almost seventy years ago: “Our business is service.” This sounds obvious once it has been said. But first there has to be a realization that a telephone system, being a natural monopoly, was susceptible to nationalization and the privately owned telephone service in a developed and industrialized country was exceptional and needed community support for its survival.

Here is the part which relates to our earlier post about the "Microsoft Hater" label:

Second, there has been the realization that community support could not be obtained by propaganda campaigns or by attacking critics as “un-American” or “socialistic”. It could be obtained only by creating customer satisfaction. This realization meant radical innovations in business policy. It meant constant indoctrination in dedication to service for all employees, and public relations which stressed service.

Kind of like “People-ready”? Or the illusion of “charity”, as illustrated this morning?

Microsoft speaks about “constant indoctrination” and “radical innovations in business policy”. How about “radical innovations” in technology rather than in marketing (“constant indoctrination”)?

Microsoft continues to defend some sort of a communist vision, wherein Microsoft ought to be at the centre of computing for the betterment of society. Their real reason for bringing up the subject is that even back 1991 — well before the USDOJ vs Microsoft case — the FTC called Microsoft “anticompetitive” and actually took action:

Win32 is an alternative standard architecture defined by Microsoft. It is our challenge to alternative standards, and we stand a chance of making it stick because of our dominance in the market. The biggest obstacles to making this happen are probably political rather then technical or business related. This standard is only one of a series we contemplate which lead to a new component architecture and true IAYF.

The recent FTC probe of Microsoft is a symptom of this coming challenge. The probe may fail, and I’m sure there is no basis for it. But it should be interpreted as the warning shot of a war that we will lose if we don’t recognize the danger and take actions now.

The recent letter from Senator Metzenbaum (from OHIO of all places) telling the FTC to pursue this case vigorously because Microsoft clearly has been ‘anticompetitive’ is an example of the kind of political forces that will rise against us as our success and dominance increase, unless we turn this feeling and win support.

Microsoft wants to be treated as though it is a privileged “chosen one” which controls the ‘standards’ and eliminates competition in platforms, supposedly for the benefit of ISVs (current accounts seem to suggest otherwise). It’s very selfish and egocentric, especially given the fact that by this stage, Microsoft had committed crime to get where it was.

We must make it clear that our business is providing the framework and standards for building apps and integrating them into a common framework where they work well together and get the benefits of synergy. We must make it clear that what we do is for the benefit of the majority of ISVs and businesses, and thus for the country, and that it is in their interest to help us succeed. We must set this as our goal.

To accept this goal means to provide leadership for apps other ways besides delivering software such as Windows. We must do other (perhaps less profitable) tasks which contribute to the same goal.

For example, we should take the lead in establishing a common approach to UI and to interoperability (of which OLE is only a part). Our efforts to date are focussed too much on our own apps, and only incidentally on the rest of the industry. We want to own these standards, so we should not participate in standards groups. Rather, we should call ‘to me’ to the industry and set a standard that works now and is for everyone’s benefit. We are large enough that this can work.

Here is the part about “evangelism” and such things:

We should develop spokespeople who can establish themselves as effective advocates for the enablement of a large software industry build on wide standards.

Here is one part about using the education system/s to indoctrinate people while young, having them become mere clients of Microsoft.

We should become actively involved in education in order to enable people to use software – i.e. we should solve the usability problem by attacking both ends of the problem (UI complexity and user experience). We might do this through local schools, teachers, colleges where they prepare teachers for local schools, through universities, etc.

Microsoft then talks about influence in government:

A significant investment is required to do this task effectively. It should be done by a separate group and not by product groups that make their numbers by delivering specific apps. The group should have sufficient talent and experience to deal with engineers in MS and other companies, to deal with the press, with business people, and with politicians.

They should be committed to enabling applications to reach ever wider markets and providing more value by working together. We are too big to treat our business as strictly business – it is a matter of public affairs.

Finally it says:

If we are successful, we will be asked/encouraged/led to extend the reach of our architecture to mainframe and mini computer platforms. Our architecture will achieve the goal that IBM set for SAA. The difference will be that we own it.

“The difference will be that we own it,” concludes this man from Microsoft. Just as Microsoft broke the law to “own” more people’s documents.


Appendix: Comes vs. Microsoft – exhibit px09509, as text


From richardb Thu Oct 31 16:04:39 1991
To: billg
Subject: Managing the Microsoft Image for Public and Political Acceptance
Date: Thu Oct 31 16:59:01 1991
Status: RO

Daryl suggested that I should copy you on this:

> from: From richardb Thu Oct 31 12:22:15 1991
To: mikehal
Subject: Managing the Microsoft Image for Public and Political Acceptance
Date: Thu Oct 31 12:22:11 1991

The position of Microsoft in the market has grown rapidly; today, it has an impact on the economy, the information infrastructure of business, and the public that is reminiscent of the situation of AT&T in the early nineteen hundreds when telephones had been widely accepted, but not yet become ubiquitous.

Peter Drucker has written an account if how AT&T recognized the implications of its position at the time, and how it responded successfully. I would like to recount that story and then suggest how Microsoft’s situation is similar, and how it can and should apply the lessons of our predecessor in order to be equally successful for the long term (25 to 50 years).

“One of the earliest and most answers (to the question ‘what is our business’) was worked out by Theodore N. Vail (1845 – 1920) for the American Telephone and Telegraph Company almost seventy years ago: “Our business is service.” This sounds obvious once it has been said. But first there has to be a realization that a telephone system, being a natural monopoly, was susceptible to nationalization and the privately owned telephone service in a developed and industrialized country was exceptional and needed community support for its survival.

Second, there has been the realization that community support could not be obtained by propaganda campaigns or by attacking critics as “un-American” or “socialistic”. It could be obtained only by creating customer satisfaction. This realization meant radical innovations in business policy. It meant constant indoctrination in dedication to service for all employees, and public relations which stressed service.

It meant emphasis on research and technological leadership, and it required financial policy which assumed that the company had to give service wherever there was a demand, and that it was management’s job to find the necessary capitol and to earn a return on it. The United States would hardly have gone through the New Deal period without a serious attempt at telephone nationalization but for careful analysis of its own business that the Telephone Company made between 1905 and 1915.

Microsoft’s position is not exactly the same, but there are strong parallels.

The establishment of a universal platform upon which to build software applications is in the interest of the general public, and of most ISVs, unless they are in the business of supplying competing platforms.

The explosion of new software applications and ISVs after the market for them was increased by a common PC platform is analogous to the growth in the telephone business as the number of callable subscribers increased. Software system platforms define communities that can purchase software, analogous to the communities served by competing telephone networks of the early 1900′s

Just as the nation needed a common carrier for telephony, this nation needs a single common platform upon which to build software, so that the energies of our software engineers can be applied to building new products at a higher level, rather then systems that duplicate work already done by competing platforms. Multiple system architectures exist today, because the technology is relatively new, and we are still learning what works, but we will converge on a common solution (for example, consider the multiple window systems starting from Xerox Parc’s Star that have appeared). As that happens, competition will be of less value, and the advantages of a tolerated monopoly will be greater. I believe convergence will take place in this decade.

The industry has recognized the value of such a monopoly and has attempted to create one without creating a competitor by establishing committees and standards groups (e.g. POSIX, Xwindows). Unfortunately, such standards are defined by the groups who build systems, and thus will not in fact establish a standard. For telephones, the analogy would be of individual telephone companies which establish interface standards to switch calls between systems. It will work only as wee as such standards – which is to say not as well as a true monopoly where the single vendor could apply more global optimizations and apply larger advantages of scale.

Win32 is an alternative standard architecture defined by Microsoft. It is our challenge to alternative standards, and we stand a chance of making it stick because of our dominance in the market. The biggest obstacles to making this happen are probably political rather then technical or business related. This standard is only one of a series we contemplate which lead to a new component architecture and true IAYF.

The recent FTC probe of Microsoft is a symptom of this coming challenge. The probe may fail, and I’m sure there is no basis for it. But it should be interpreted as the warning shot of a war that we will lose if we don’t recognize the danger and take actions now.

The recent letter from Senator Metzenbaum (from OHIO of all places) telling the FTC to pursue this case vigorously because Microsoft clearly has been ‘anticompetitive’ is an example of the kind of political forces that will rise against us as our success and dominance increase, unless we turn this feeling and win support.

We must make it clear that our business is providing the framework and standards for building apps and integrating them into a common framework where they work well together and get the benefits of synergy. We must make it clear that what we do is for the benefit of the majority of ISVs and businesses, and thus for the country, and that it is in their interest to help us succeed. We must set this as our goal.

To accept this goal means to provide leadership for apps other ways besides delivering software such as Windows. We must do other (perhaps less profitable) tasks which contribute to the same goal.

For example, we should take the lead in establishing a common approach to UI and to interoperability (of which OLE is only a part). Our efforts to date are focussed too much on our own apps, and only incidentally on the rest of the industry. We want to own these standards, so we should not participate in standards groups. Rather, we should call ‘to me’ to the industry and set a standard that works now and is for everyone’s benefit. We are large enough that this can work.

We can take some simple initial steps such as publishing, publish books and articles about existing standards for GUI Interfaces, for apps, and a guide to solving frequent UI issues in a common way. These may be as useful and enabling for our ISVs as the software itself. We can back this up with sample code and tools (such as additional standard Win controls) that simplify building apps according to these guidelines.

We should develop spokespeople who can establish themselves as effective advocates for the enablement of a large software industry build on wide standards.

We should become actively involved in education in order to enable people to use software – i.e. we should solve the usability problem by attacking both ends of the problem (UI complexity and user experience). We might do this through local schools, teachers, colleges where they prepare teachers for local schools, through universities, etc.

A significant investment is required to do this task effectively. It should be done by a separate group and not by product groups that make their numbers by delivering specific apps. The group should have sufficient talent and experience to deal with engineers in MS and other companies, to deal with the press, with business people, and with politicians.

They should be committed to enabling applications to reach ever wider markets and providing more value by working together. We are too big to treat our business as strictly business – it is a matter of public affairs.

If we are successful, we will be asked/encouraged/led to extend the reach of our architecture to mainframe and mini computer platforms. Our architecture will achieve the goal that IBM set for SAA. The difference will be that we own it.

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

Decor ᶃ Gemini Space

Below is a Web proxy. We recommend getting a Gemini client/browser.

Black/white/grey bullet button This post is also available in Gemini over at this address (requires a Gemini client/browser to open).

Decor ✐ Cross-references

Black/white/grey bullet button Pages that cross-reference this one, if any exist, are listed below or will be listed below over time.

Decor ▢ Respond and Discuss

Black/white/grey bullet button If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

DecorWhat Else is New


  1. Links 03/07/2022: China 'Rallies Support for Kylin Linux' and SparkyLinux 4 EOL

    Links for the day



  2. Global Dynamics of the Demise of Microsoft Windows (Now Down to 27%)

    The situation of Windows' "share" (however subjective any measure would be) is grim; despite a "new" release of Windows, as recently as several months ago, "market share" decreases fast



  3. Francisca Pacheco López on Richard Stallman

    A letter from Madrid, posted a few days ago



  4. The World Wide Web is Not Growing, Gemini Does

    The Web, which is over 30 years old, peaked quite a few years ago; it's increasingly just a conduit of traffic unrelated to actual pages (articles, blogs) and just a vehicle for "apps", which are in turn centralised or closely guarded by few companies and very few governments (public communication is not their goal, manipulation and social control are the principal objectives)



  5. Links 03/07/2022: GNU/Linux Steam Surge, GitHub Breaks the Law

    Links for the day



  6. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, July 02, 2022

    IRC logs for Saturday, July 02, 2022



  7. Flooz on a Blockchain

    Guest post by Ryan, reprinted with permission



  8. Links 02/07/2022: Debian 9 (Stretch) EOL, FocusWriter 1.8.1, and Darktable 4.0

    Links for the day



  9. After Freenode's Demise It's OFTC That's Gaining in IRC, Not Libera.Chat

    IRC 12 months after the dust 'settled'



  10. Finland Turns 18

    This summer in Finland there seem to be changes



  11. Copyleft is Still Better and More Suitable for Business

    Copyleft does not mean one cannot make money; it just means proprietary software companies such as Microsoft stand to lose their dying empires, only to be replaced by new businesses that market and support GPL-licensed systems



  12. With New Data Just in (a Couple of Hours Ago), It Seems Clear Microsoft Windows Continues to Lose Market Share in July

    As shown above, Windows continues its demise; there’s also rapid erosion of Windows "market share" in Russia this year (“Russians [are] switching to Linux”) and sooner or later Windows will be just a quarter of the market (maybe by year’s end). Windows is at 10% in Turkey (down by a huge amount this year) and in Russia it’s down by about 5% since the war. In India GNU/Linux (“proper”, not ChromeOS) is up to nearly 5% of desktops/laptops.



  13. Links 02/07/2022: PSPP 1.6.2 Released, Linux Mint Rejects Parts of Systemd, Lots of Politics

    Links for the day



  14. Walking Like the Talking, Acting Like One's Preaching

    It has now been about 2 years since lock-downs in the world's Western nations were first loosened or lifted; we've thankfully taken advantage of all that commotion (persistent flux; we've not solved the underlying issues) to expand beyond and Web and become self-hosted wherever possible



  15. IRC Proceedings: Friday, July 01, 2022

    IRC logs for Friday, July 01, 2022



  16. EPO Steering Off the Road, Just Like the Drunken Son of António Campinos, Who Crashed the Car and Begged for Impunity

    With the EPO rapidly turning into a corrupt dynasty of rogue politicians, lawyers and bankers (not scientists) we must turn to constitutions and treaties that they knowingly violate with impunity



  17. Koch Operatives Working to Shape Patent Law in Favour of Monopolies and Oligarchs

    Patent systems are being hijacked by monopolists and plutocrats for their financial gain and protectionism; it's a longstanding issue because it begets constitutional violations (glossed over by bought or installed "Justices", which is another creeping threat, especially in light of recent developments in the US Supreme Court and patently, manifestly illegal actions by Team UPC)



  18. At the EPO, “Online” Means Microsoft Windows Only (“Unitary Patent” Also Limited to Microsoft Customers!)

    The EPO's "special" (corrupt) relationship with Microsoft is a major liability for Europe; does one need to adopt back doors and US surveillance to interact with the EPO?



  19. Microsoft GitHub Exposé — Part XXII — 'Mr. GitHub Copilot' Balabhadra (Alex) Graveley Pleads Guilty After Assaulting Women

    Balabhadra (Alex) Graveley from Microsoft GitHub (the man behind the GPL violation machine called “Copilot”) has “pled guilty to get deferred sentence”



  20. Links 01/07/2022: Russians Switching to GNU/Linux, New WINE Release

    Links for the day



  21. Links 01/07/2022: More Widespread Calls to Delete GitHub

    Links for the day



  22. [Meme] President Crybaby

    EPO President António Campinos, who constantly assaults the EPO’s staff, has portrayed himself as a poor victim of “hostile” staff (reversal of narratives)



  23. People Are Very Angry That Campinos Was Left in Positions of Power Without Any Competition and in Spite of Failing to Fulfill Essential Goals

    As predicted, people are infuriated by the decision of the Administrative Council to give Campinos several more years to destroy the EPO and its reputation (while moreover pushing a totally illegal and unconstitutional patent court system, which severely harms the image of the European Union)



  24. Microsoft Windows is a 'Burning Platform' (Both on the Server Side and the Client Side)

    'Burning platform' is a derogatory term from Microsoft's Elop; ironically, today's 'burning platform' is actually Windows, even if the corporate media isn't talking about that



  25. Links 01/07/2022: Nitrux 2.2.1 and Raspberry Pi Pico W Chatter

    Links for the day



  26. Links 01/07/2022: Wayland 1.21.0 and SteamOS 3.3 Beta

    Links for the day



  27. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, June 30, 2022

    IRC logs for Thursday, June 30, 2022



  28. [Meme] EPO Election (Auction)

    The corruption at the EPO did not end with Benoît Battistelli‘s departure; it’s still deepening



  29. Links 01/07/2022: Condres OS 1.0 and Microsoft Losing More Share in Web Servers

    Links for the day



  30. Published 10 Minutes Ago: IRCNow by Aaron Lin

    This talk was uploaded moments ago. “Of the users, by the users, for the users…”


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts