A bad time to be called Bill

Is the DoJ out to get Bill Gates? Or is it just his bad luck to be called Bill and to be powerful in the US right now?

Aside from the fact that any prolonged attack on Microsoft could be harmful to the entire industry, a US court case about unfair competition in the land of free enterprise is distinctly ironic.

The very idea that a competitive company, such as Microsoft, would use its position of strength in the market to play off one chip vendor against another and set up deals in the software market that would favour its own position, can you imagine that?

Well of course you can. But is it fair? Well, Netscape signed the deal.

And as for playing Intel off against AMD and Cyrix, should we worry?

In the end, it all comes down to the mighty God of Wall Street and the divine quarterly earnings per share figures. But I've written enough about that already - and about Bill Gates. So let's get straight to the point.

What Microsoft's case is really about is fairness.

It's not fair when you buy a used car that's been clocked, nor is it fair when you get stitched up on a business deal. Of course, what was or was not fair in this case is a matter for the US courts to decide.

But the point is that deals only work when they work for everyone. It's time we got away from the idea that profit is everything. It's just not true.

Maybe Microsoft should look east for inspiration. I met a guy recently who used to work for Panasonic.

I've had some experience of this company's philosophy and I think many vendors could learn a lot from it.

This guy told me about a software development contract that he'd set up when he was new to the company. He'd managed to get the supplier's price right down. When his boss was about to sign off the order, he asked: 'Are we getting a good deal here?' 'You bet,' came the proud reply, 'it's about #10, 000 below the going rate.'

His boss did not sign the order. Instead he handed it back to this guy and said: 'OK, I'm going to recommend that you do one thing and I'm going to TELL you to do another. First, I think you should go and apologise to these people personally for screwing them down so much. I realise that you were only trying to make a good impression and get a good deal for us and they will understand that as well. Second, you WILL apologise on behalf of Panasonic because that is just not the way we do business.'

He went back to the dealer, the deal got signed for #10,000 more and everyone was happy: Panasonic benefited from the software dealer's goodwill, and the software dealer got paid the going rate.

What worries me about the Microsoft case is this: yes, it could be harmful to the business in the short term if Microsoft suffers, but if the company has tried to corner markets and sidetrack competitors, what has it been doing to customers? The allegations throw up worrying questions that need answers.