Bill Gates Takes the Stand In WordPerfect Trial

Hugh Pickens writes "Remember WorldPerfect? Bill Gates took the witness stand to defend his company against a $1 billion antitrust lawsuit that claims Microsoft duped Novell into thinking he would include WordPerfect in the new Windows system, then backed out because he feared it was too good. Gates testified Monday that Microsoft was racing to put out Windows 95 when he dropped technical features that would no longer support the rival's word processor. He said that in making the decision about the code, he was concerned not about Novell but about one element of the program that could have caused computers to crash. That code, technically known as 'name space extensions,' had to do with the display of folders and files. Novell attorney Jeff Johnson concedes that Microsoft was under no legal obligation to provide advance access to Windows 95 so Novell could prepare a compatible version but contends that Microsoft enticed Novell to work on a version, only to withdraw support months before Windows 95 hit the market. 'We got stabbed in the back.'"

Comments

Re:Groklaw has a pretty good article.

[CmdrPony]

Personally, I think Gates has a really good point here. Remember all those old OSs? They crashed a lot. Even Linux. Gates wanted to take out some of that.

Re:Groklaw has a pretty good article.

[gweihir]

The only Linux crashes I remember from that time are when I misspecified memory sizes on the kernel commandline. Otherwise rock-solid. It was clear back then that in comparison Windows will continue to suck. And it does. Even Win7 is a sorry excuse for an OS where it counts: Reliability, Security, Performance, Simplicity and the tool-set it comes with.

Not even really suitable as a toy. And we are not talking VHS vs. BETAMAX here. VHS was at least halfway decent. Windows is not. The hours I have wasted on this piece of trash are incredible. For example, as it ages a bit, Win7 now crashes about as often as XP did before. Fixing things requires the most obscure procedures that are not even logical after you have discovered them. Compared to Win7, a full-fledged modern Linux is simple, clear and easy to administrate. Which it is decidedly not in absolute terms. But whenever you fix something on Linux, you learn something. With Win7 you do not. Except that its designers are morons. And with Linux, things stay fixed. Again, with Windows they do not. I would have long ago moved away if I weren't a gamer.

Re:Groklaw has a pretty good article.

[ackthpt]

Gates' claim that they wanted to clean up 95 and that meant leaving out file naming stuff that WP relied upon, though, is disingenuous and a lie.

I agree. I think even a non-technical person might be suspicious of that claim. "Yeah, by astonishing coincidence it just happened to be that the thing that you say was broken and had to be removed was the one thing that kept your competitors from being able to run on your platform. Right."

Gates may as well admit it - Windows 95 wasn't market ready, but they were willing to push it out the door and fix it later - which has been their practice ever since (if you doubt this, ask yourself about Vista.) Weak argument. Even then it was all about monopoly.