Fighting Terror By Taking Away The Tools
Excellent argument for "deny use" technologies. The sorts of concepts espoused here are broadly applicable to many software markets as well - too often, when trying to solve a problem we simply take the wrong approach.

Insight: Eliminating the Tools of Terror. "Deny-use" technology could prevent terrorism and jump-start the economy [Technology Review - Security and Defense] 

---

What Punishment Fits The Crime?

The second of a two article series on the private anti-trust actions taken by Netscape, Sun, and Be against Microsoft. The articles do a good job of articulating the primary points of view on the topic. In the first, Megan McArdle argues that while Microsoft was very, very bad, Netscape simply didn't compete effectively and deserves to die. She points out that since other Microsoft products - MSN and Money - were not helped by placement of an icon on the desktop, it's impossible that Netscape was damaged by the inclusion of a similar icon. After all, people will - as they did with MSN and Money - seek out superior products - like Quicken and AOL. History suggests that's largely a specious argument - but it doesn't matter, since the placement of the icon isn't really all that important in the competitive battle between Netscape and Microsoft. Far more important are the actions Microsoft took to stifle competition - actions documented by J. J. Clifford in today's article:

"The real migration to Internet Explorer started only after Microsoft played its trump card, and used its operating-system monopoly to close off Netscape's two most effective and cost-efficient distribution channels: original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) like Dell and Compaq; and Internet access providers such as AOL. The Microsoft executive in charge of operating systems, James Allchin, pushed this strategy, arguing 'we must leverage Windows more.'

OEMs offered particularly effective distribution, as they could simply install Netscape's browser on every machine they shipped. Microsoft fought back by bullying these OEMs into exclusively distributing Internet Explorer. While some of the company's tactics were simply questionable -- such as offering Windows-licensing discounts to cooperative OEMS -- others smacked of thuggery. For instance, Microsoft threatened to audit Gateway's internal use of Microsoft products if the computer maker wouldn't abandon Netscape Navigator."

Both articles are well worth a read to gain an excellent understanding of the real issues at hand.

Salon.com Technology | Microsoft should be punished: "Microsoft should be punished The feds failed to order a breakup when it could have done some good. Now, based on the government's findings, Sun, Netscape and Be are suing -- with good reason. " 

---