Microsoft denies making Windows incompatible

Peter Kaplan

WASHINGTON: A Microsoft Corp. executive on Monday denied charges that the

company tries to gain advantage by making Windows operating system incompatible

with rivals' software.

Microsoft vice president Robert Short, the fourth Microsoft executive to

testify in the landmark antitrust trial, said the software giant makes

"significant efforts" to make its operating system work well with its

competitors' software.

"I emphatically disagree with the suggestion that Microsoft deliberately

introduces incompatibilities to prevent our competitors' software from working

with our products," Short said in written testimony.

Three other Microsoft officials, including company chairman Bill Gates, have

already appeared in court to try to convince US District Judge Colleen

Kollar-Kotelly not to impose severe antitrust sanctions proposed by nine states

still suing Microsoft.

The software giant reached a settlement with the Justice Department and nine

other states in November. That agreement is designed to give computer makers

more freedom to feature non-Microsoft software on the machines they sell.

But nine states, including California, Massachusetts and Iowa, have refused

to go along with the settlement, saying it is inadequate and won't prevent

future antitrust violations.

Short's testimony takes issue with comments by executives from competitors

Novell Inc., Sun Microsystems Inc. and Red Hat Inc., who told the judge in

earlier testimony that she should force Microsoft to disclose more of the inner

workings of Windows.

Short said different versions of Windows work better with rivals' software

over time because they adhere to a growing number of industry standards and he

cited examples in which the company is cooperating with some of its most bitter

rivals to make software programs "interoperate" with each other.

"Given these efforts, the notion that Microsoft 'retaliates' against

software developers who do not do what Microsoft wants is completely

unfounded," Short said.

Microsoft's case got more backing earlier on Monday from an executive from

Qwest Communications International, who told the court that the software giant

would not be able to thwart emerging competition in the Internet services

business using its monopoly power.

Qwest vice president Gregg Sutherland disputed earlier testimony from a

representative of SBC Communications Inc. that without the strict antitrust

sanctions, Microsoft could crush SBC's planned Internet-based messaging service.

"It couldn't happen," Sutherland told the judge. "That would

be a nonsensical thing for any (competitor) to do." But under questioning

from the states' lawyer, Sutherland acknowledged that he knew little about

Microsoft's past anti-competitive conduct and had no experience with the kind of

Web-based services at issue in the case.

"I have no specific (knowledge) about Microsoft's plans,"

Sutherland said, when pressed about how he prepared for his testimony. In his

written testimony before Kollar-Kotelly, Sutherland tried to rebut allegations

made by SBC engineer Larry Pearson.

Qwest versus SBC

Pearson, leader of a team at the No. 2 regional telephone company that is

developing SBC's Unified Messaging Service (UMS), told Kollar-Kotelly Microsoft

was well-placed to crush the product, scheduled for initial deployment later

this year.

Pearson said Microsoft had enormous economic incentive to block or degrade

communication between Windows-based PCs and Internet servers running

non-Microsoft software like those of SBC.

Sutherland said any company that wants to compete in the telecommunications

business must make its technologies work seamlessly with other companies'

services.

"A communications product or service that fails to meet this expectation

of ubiquitous connectivity would have little or no prospect of commercial

viability," Sutherland said.

Under questioning from states' attorney John Schmidtlein, however, Sutherland

conceded he had no direct experience with Web-based messaging and was only a

part of a small group at Qwest that is studying the possibility of getting into

the business of Web-based messaging.

He also admitted the group was formed less than a month ago -- nearly two

months after Microsoft named him as a witness in the antitrust case. "My

intention is to offer the court an understanding of how the communications world

works," Sutherland told the judge. "My testimony is not specific to

Microsoft's behavior on the Windows desktop."