In a Nov. 10 letter, Daniel John Sobieski defends Microsoft against the monopoly ruling by U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson by attempting to argue that Microsoft is not, in fact, a monopoly. This is a novel concept, as Microsoft’s domination of the personal computer operating system industry is common knowledge to just about anyone who owns a computer.
In a wide-ranging argument (which somehow manages to include such diverse subjects as the public school system, Chinese espionage and campaign finance reform, among others), Sobieski goes out of his way to change the subject from computers to government mismanagement. Sorry, Mr. Sobieski. Comparing Microsoft to the public school system is not apples and oranges. That’s comparing apples and refrigerators.
In his letter, Mr. Sobieski asks, “Monopoly? So what exactly does Microsoft dominate?” Has he ever heard of Windows? Is he unaware that there is one and only one dominant operating system in the computer industry?
Finally, he states: “Let the marketplace alone. It can take care of itself.” Poppycock. The marketplace is not strong and vibrant because the government let it alone. Far from it. The marketplace is strong and vibrant because, for the past century, it has been regulated to protect consumers against industrial tyrants. Antitrust lawsuits have broken up, among others, the phone and oil monopolies and, as a result, the consumers (as well as the industries themselves) have been the better for it.
Remember, Mr. Sobieski, competition is good. That’s why monopolies are illegal.
