Microsoft and How It's a Monopoly Essay

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,

- There were large cost amounts that the Department of National Revenue dealt with that Microsoft was supposed to be charged with.

Windows, a program that was created in 1983, but did not change the market significantly until 1990, has grown to control 94.1% of the operating system market (Newman). This has required other companies in the software industry to make all of their applications Windows compatible. Critics claim that Microsoft systematically eliminated all competition of other operating systems and software manufacturers. Microsoft also controls a large part of the software industry. According to sales from April 2002, Microsoft sold 89% of office software to consumers (Washington Post). Microsoft bundles these applications with the Windows operating system, which is, according to them, an effective technique. Critics assert that this forces other makers of office software, like Corel, to lose business, because consumers will not buy another application if one is already pre-installed. Critics point to the proposed 1995 merger between Microsoft and Inuit which ultimately failed. Inuit is the maker of the best-selling money management

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

The Justice Department and the states contend that Microsoft is violating the Sherman Antitrust Act, which was passed by Congress in 1890. The act has two sections. Section I prohibits certain types of agreements that restrict the flow of trade. Section II prohibits the misuse of monopoly power, namely anti-competitive actions that seek to maintain that monopoly power and actions that attempt to use that monopoly power to dominate another market (2).

Briefly speculate as to why Microsoft chose to expense all software costs as incurred rather than capitalizing a portion of these

Companies do not have the freedom to merge and acquire as they please do. All have to meet the requirements and essentially be approved by regulatory bodies. In the context of regulations, antitrust laws and security laws are commonly referred to by regulator to determine whether a merger or acquisition should be allowed or rejected. Antitrust laws prohibit mergers and acquisitions that impede competition. The point is very simple where antitrust is referred to as competition. The goal is to increase competition because more competition in economics means that consumers get more at a fairer or lower price. Anytime a regulator believes that a merger or acquisition will make an industry or market less competitive, the business transaction might

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,

The U.S. government charged that Microsoft had violated antitrust law. Microsoft disagreed. Do you agree with the U.S. government, or with Microsoft? In answering this question, you may wish to address two issues. Was Microsoft a monopoly? Did it use its monopoly to compete unfairly against other companies?

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

Competition in economics is rivalry in supplying or acquiring an economic service or good. Sellers compete with other sellers, and buyers with other buyers. In its perfect form, there is competition among many small buyers and sellers, none of whom is too large to affect the market as a whole; in practice, competition is often reduced by a great variety of limitations, including monopolies. The monopoly, a limit on competition, is an example of market failure. Competition among merchants in foreign trade was common in ancient times, and it has been a characteristic of mercantile and industrial expansion since the Middle Ages. By the 19th century, classical economic theorists had come to regard

Does the government have the right to regulate large corporations, namely the Microsoft Corporation? If so, then to what extent can the government do so? Based on our research, it is the government’s responsibility to remedy Microsoft’s noncompetitive behavior in order to increase fair competition.

Microsoft had to split their operating system company from the rest of their organization. Another action Microsoft took was its relations with Java. They licensed a version of Java that worked mainly with windows where they tried to drive out the competitors and in later years they didn’t even allow Java to work with Windows XP (Rivkin 4). Microsoft tried to basically kill Java and with this the producers of Java sued Microsoft. Last, Microsoft took actions toward their competition in open-source software: Lunix. Microsoft responded by opening up into own server OS code like Lunix did. They actually sold stripped-down versions of the code to emerging economies and they also set up a lab that’s sole purpose was to find competitive weaknesses in the Lunix OS (Rivkin 5).

Large corporations such as Wal-Mart or Home Depot often come under criticism for putting mom-and-pop shops out of business. While this may be a valid criticism, the consumers neglect to realize that they play the biggest part in shutting these businesses down. Consumers across the country are always looking for the best deals or the lowest prices, and in most cases the larger corporations are where products can be found at the lowest price. Many small business owners and the populations of small towns dislike large corporations moving into the area because they believe it negatively effects the local

* Take advantage over the competitors with the use of the data base that they have.