Re: Bundling and operating systems

[Mitch Stone <mstone@vc.net>]

--- From a message sent by Simon Cooke on 12/19/99 3:51 AM ---

>From: "Lewis A. Mettler" <lmettler@lamlaw.com>
>> Microsoft bundled IE because they saw that 80% of the consumers
>> preferred Navigator.
>
>Not according to sworn testimony from Marc Andreesen.
>
>Someone brought this to my attention (they're not on-list):
>According to unrefuted (repeat, unrefuted) evidence 
>presented in the Microsoft case, Microsoft told 
>representatives from Netscape and other companies that it 
>planned to include its browser free with its operating 
>systems. This occurred prior to the release of the first 
>beta version of Netscape Navigator. 
>
>This information comes from Mark Andreesen's own personal 
>notes. Notes he wrote himself. It's right there in the 
>evidence.
>
>It is literally impossible for Microsoft to have decided 
>to give away its browser, or for Microsoft to have 
>decided to include it with its operating systems, because 
>of Netscape's market position. When Microsoft announced 
>that decision, Netscape did not have a market position. 
>Netscape did not have a released product. Netscape did 
>not even have a beta version of a product.
>
>---
>
>So... you're wrong, apparently.

I think you are being misled and/or perpetuating a canard. Microsoft 
claimed to have planned to include "Internet technologies" with Windows, 
not a "web browser" per se. These technologies were in fact MSN, in its 
original form (modeled after AOL). Dollying back to the full frame, I 
think you find that it took approximately one year for Bill Gates et al. 
to recognize that the MSN model was flawed and that they could never hope 
to beat AOL at their own game (Apple also tried and failed). What finally 
convinced Microsoft to license the Spyglass code and build a web browser 
of their "own" was the success of Netscape. This represented a major 
change in Microsoft's plans, not the original plan.

Mitch Stone
mstone@vc.net