Microsoft Case Analysis Essay

     Relatively speaking, Microsoft uses many of the same strategies for its promotions as Sony and Nintendo.

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 their dominance of the industry at stake. They could potentially come out on top if left to continue their current tactics. They are masterfully “marketing their products” and it is paying off for them (Love, 1997).

United States vs. Microsoft is one the largest, most controversial antitrust lawsuits in American history. Many claim the government is wrongly punishing Microsoft for being innovative and successful, arguing that Windows dominates the market because of the product’s popularity, not because of malpractice by the parent company. Others argue in favor of the government, claiming that Microsoft’s practices conflict with the free market ideal. There are many arguments for both sides of the lawsuit, but what the case really comes down to is this: does the government have the right to interfere in today’s marketplace? Or is Microsoft violating laws that are rightfully imposed by the government?

G.G. Dess, G.T. Lumpkin, M.L. Taylor, A.A. Thompson, and A.J. Strickland III, Strategic Management (Boston, McGraw Hill, 2004) pp. 141-148.

As part of the "Final Judgement", Microsoft was prohibited from entering into agreements allowing them to fine OEM's for using

Microsoft’s policy enables competition between PC producers resulting in lower prices. This also causes stratification of the PCs resulting in low-end, average, and luxury versions.

No matter who wins, the case almost certainly will be appealed, probably all the way to the Supreme Court. If the government wins at the trial court, it has already specified that it wants Microsoft to cancel contracts deemed exclusionary. In addition, the government wants Microsoft either to strip out its Internet browsing technology from Windows 98 or to include a rival browser made by Netscape Communications Corp. The government also indicated in October that, should it win, it would seek an additional hearing where it would suggest additional sanctions that should be placed

Pearce, J. A., II, Robinson, R. B. (2011). Strategic management: Formulation, implementation, and control (12th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill/Irwin

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,

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

Windows” (“Microsoft: Court’s…). Microsoft implies that there still is competition; such as Mac OS, Linux, and other operating systems. Though this claim may have support, the “District Court found that Windows accounts for a greater than

Microsoft and its supporter’s claims that they are not breaking any laws, and are just

The patterns I see with Microsoft’s reactions to competition is that they rely heavily on the fact that they are leaders in the field of operating systems and they use this monopoly as leverage on what they give out to their consumers with their “bundling capabilities” (Rivkin 4). In the past I believe they have been successful against competitors even though they have gotten into legal trouble while doing it. This is because even after the law suits they still remained ahead of the pack in market shares.