My local paper, the San Jose Mercury News, published a top-of-front-page article on AOL's lawsuit against Microsoft. It was accompanied by a column by their computer writer, Dan Gillmor, whose loathing of Microsoft oozes out of every article he writes.

I sent the paper a letter, a copy of which follows:

Your articles on the Netscape-AOL conflict, featured prominently on the front page in
your Jan. 23 Mercury News, pretty much covered the same old territory about Evil
Microsoft. A few clarifications added to your articles may have been useful:



First, your "Internet Market Share" chart on the front page was misleading. This
obviously refers to the market share for the respective Netscape and Internet Explorer
browsers. Both browsers are free for the taking, which makes the concept of "market
share" a bit tentative. It's not like Microsoft is making money hand over fist with IE.
Both browsers can be downloaded by anyone. What is the financial value of a
monopoly in a product that doesn't cost anything? How do you compensate a
"competitor" for this? A person of even limited computer experience could switch
browsers at no cost whatsoever, even on a machine which came with IE preinstalled. I
personally use both browsers, often at the same time for different purposes.

Second, a piece of information which may have put things in a little more perspective was
missing. There is the ISP market for actual online services, separate from the browser
software. In this market, people pay for services, and real money changes hands.
According to a chart in this article, from Cahners In-Stat, in 1997 AOL had 24.3
percent of this market, while Microsoft had 3.6 percent. In 1999, both companies lost
users, but AOL still had 21.5 percent of the market, while MSN had a measly 1.5
percent, or about 7 percent of AOL's share. I didn't see a nice pie chart in your article
with this information.

Third, although AOL owns Netscape, when I get one of those free CD-ROMs in the
mail from AOL for their services, guess what browser is included and installed by
default? Hint: it ain't Netscape. You CAN get Netscape for AOL, but it needs to be
downloaded, and is apparently not on the CD-ROM. This doesn't project much
confidence in their product. It is common knowledge that AOL purchased Netscape
largely for its NetCenter, and has left Netscape pretty much sitting on the shelf since
then. In other words, the company that owns the browser has made a value
judgement on it similar to what many users have made. It's also worth noting in passing
that when Microsoft Windows is installed on one of my systems, a link for certain AOL
services shows up prominently, and unasked for, on my screen when it's done, hardly a
vicious anti-competitive tactic.

Fourth, Microsoft came from behind to catch up with Netscape after being blindsided by
the new Internet market. This is less a matter of evil business practices on the part of
Microsoft that it is a matter of constant work and attention to product quality and
customer needs. Ask anyone who has used both browsers over the past five years.
Even Dan Gillmor, whose virulent hatred of Microsoft is a matter of written record, has
to admit that Netscape's and AOL's incompetence is one reason that the situation is
where it is.

This entire lawsuit is a shakedown, and yet another attempt to use the government to
accomplish what Microsoft's competitors cannot with their own skills. Perhaps next time
you should get a broader range of opinions from more than one expert in the computer
industry, and one without an axe to grind.

Tom Brosz