|
Feds question MSFT video
|
 |
February 2, 1999: 6:16 p.m. ET
DOJ attorney casts doubt over demo of Windows 98 performance problems
|
NEW YORK (CNNfn) - Government lawyers Tuesday questioned the veracity of a Microsoft Corp. video demonstration that illustrated the problems associated with the Windows 98 operating system after removing the Web browser.
At the heart of the government's antitrust case against Microsoft (MSFT) is the charge that the company illegally bundled the Internet Explorer Web browser within Windows to cut off a competitive threat from a rival browser by Netscape Communications Corp. (NSCP).
Microsoft has countered that Internet Explorer is an integral component of Windows and cannot be removed without causing irreparable harm to the operating system.
Microsoft's legal team attempted to illustrate that point in a video demonstration played in court Monday. The company sought to demonstrate that a program created by a government witness designed to remove Internet Explorer results in "performance degradation" within Windows 98.
But lead Justice Department attorney David Boies pointed out that a software title bar suddenly changed in the middle of the test. Boies charged that the test was not completed using the government-modified version of Windows.
Instead, Boies said the video showed that it was the standard version of Windows 98 that illustrated the performance degradation.
James Allchin, a Microsoft senior vice president, testified during government cross examination that he had personally conducted the same tests and can vouch for the results.
A Microsoft spokesman said the government is trying to "nibble around the edges" instead of focusing on the facts of testimony given in court. He added the company is checking to see whether there was a "minor editing problem" with the video.
During redirect questioning from Microsoft's legal team, Allchin said both he and the government had misinterpreted what was on the screen.
Though the issue of browser bundling is believed by antitrust experts to be the weakest link in the government's case, federal prosecutors have been scoring points in their attempts to poke holes in Microsoft's theory that the browser is a integral component of the operating system.
Last week, U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson, who is presiding over the antitrust trial in Washington, ordered Microsoft to turn over an internal spreadsheet to government lawyers. Prosecutors believe the spreadsheet shows that Microsoft knows which browser files can be removed from Windows without damaging the operating system.
Government witness Edward Felten, a Princeton University computer science professor, created the program the government claims successfully disables Internet Explorer's functions within Windows.
Witness testifies to IE bundle benefits
Separately, Microsoft released the written direct testimony of its next witness, Michael Devlin, president of Rational Software Corp. Devlin will take the stand when the government wraps up its cross examination of Allchin.
Devlin testified that the inclusion of browsing technology in Windows helps software developers write better applications. Microsoft has long held the position that the Internet Explorer-Windows bundle isn't anticompetitive because it provides benefits to consumers, computer makers and software developers.
"It is to our advantage, and to the advantage of our customers, that Microsoft distribute its Internet Explorer technology in as many ways as possible - as part of Windows 95, separately from a full Windows 95 distribution and as fully integrated with Windows 98 - so that this new technology is present on as many customer systems as possible," Devlin said.
Devlin also testified that there is "no meaningful way" to distinguish between the underlying Internet Explorer code and the underlying Windows code.
Microsoft shares fell 5-5/16 to close at 167-5/8 in Tuesday trade.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft
|
Note: Pages will open in a new browser window
External sites are not endorsed by CNNmoney
|
|
|
|
 |
|
