Microsoft decision: What it really means for the industry and consumer

It seems that perhaps in the high-tech industry, it is journalists, commentators, rival vendors and lawyers that have held the greatest interest in the Microsoft case. This obsession is in stark contrast to the ambivalence of IT professionals and business decision makers.

What unites all these groups, however, is that whether they care deeply about the case or not they want to see a quick end to this saga. Some chance.

Microsoft has long suspected that this would be a protracted affair and has chosen to keep its nose to the grindstone. It has continued to push its products irrespective of the court shenanigans. Just this year we've seen the high profile launch of Office XP and in the autumn the newest version of Windows will hit the streets. The Redmond giant is also forging routes into new areas, such as mobile operating systems and games consoling. Business as usual.

And business as usual on the money markets, it would seem. The company's share price did climb following yesterday's ruling, but by close last night, it was only up 2.25 per cent. Nasdaq itself made modest gains of 2.44 per cent.

One IT director, by contrast, told silicon.com: "I think that the breaking up of Microsoft is something the lawyers primarily will benefit from. It's not something that will benefit IT directors."

Frank Coyle, IT Director of John Menzies, was more forthcoming. He said yesterday's decision will not only "substantially delay any penalty", it may well lead to Microsoft getting off scot-free, an outcome he describes as "very bad news".

He added: "To avoid large corporations flouting the law they should be moving damn fast to impose a penalty. [For my business] it makes no difference whatsoever. If Microsoft was broken up into separate companies, the poor end user wouldn't notice a blind bit of difference."

Michael Thompson, principal analyst at research house Butler Group, suggested that the length of the case provides breathing space for many other companies in the technology sector.

Thompson said that the DoJ might have viewed its action against Microsoft as a test case. In a cut-throat industry where even business processes can now be patented, an easy win against Microsoft might have sparked-off a whole series of cases against high-tech players. As it happened, the DoJ embarked upon a monster case and no easy-win materialised.

But let's not forget that Microsoft has been found guilty of trying to monopolise the browser business by illegal means. In terms of the company's future, the decision has merely been set aside, and set aside on a technicality: a 'biased' judge.

Response from Sun, which has an alliance with Netscape in the form of internet software company iPlanet, was swift and predictable.

The company's official statement said: "As the case is turned over to the District Court, we hope that the Court will act decisively to ensure that Microsoft's illegal activity - and the harm that it has done to the industry and to consumers - is brought to an end forcefully and permanently."

In the meantime, Microsoft will do what it has been doing all along: release and heavily market new products and most importantly, not take its eye off the competitive ball.

Finally, for those who thought yesterday would mark the final episode in this long-running drama, bad news: the appeals court has just commissioned a new series. Tune in, if you can bear it.