Microsoft Promises Not to Do It Again, Hands Down Twelve Tenets

Published: July 26, 2006

by Alex Woodie

Microsoft has faced its share of criticism about its business practices over the course of its history. Illegal product bundling, abuse of monopolistic power, heavy-handedness with partners, and, now, objections over predatory pricing--one needn't dig very deep to find such complaints. To prove those days are over and that it's on the up-and-up with consumers, competitors, partners, and regulators alike, the company last week published a set of one dozen principles it says will guide the ongoing development of the Windows desktop platform. And you thought Microsoft didn't care.

The Facts Part

"Microsoft recognizes the important role its Windows desktop operating system products play in the information economy and the responsibilities that come with that role," the company said in introducing its "Twelve Tenets" (not to be confused with the Three Tenors). "To promote competitive opportunities and otherwise enhance the appeal of Windows to developers and users, Microsoft is committed to running its Windows business in accordance with the following principles that address computer manufacturer and user choice, opportunities for developers, and interoperability for users. These principles will apply to Windows desktop development projects going forward."

These 12 tenets are broken down into three main principles. Under the first principle, "Choice for Computer Manufacturers and Customers," the company lays out its guideline regarding how you may operate your computer. Firstly, computer makers and users are free to put any software on their computers. Manufacturers can even add icons and shortcuts if they like (number two), change the default setting of products like Web browsers or media players (number three), or even remove some programs such as Internet Explorer or Windows Media Player (number four). The fifth tenet is a vow that "Microsoft will not retaliate against any computer manufacturer that supports non-Microsoft software."

The second principle, "Opportunities for Developers," also points out a lot of common-sense ideas, such as tenet number six, which states that all APIs will be published. While this was already required by a U.S. antitrust ruling against Microsoft, the company says it will continue to follow this practice, even after the ruling expires in 2007.

Microsoft also committed to keeping its Windows Live offerings separate from core Windows (number seven), pledged to not block access to any Web site (number eight), and says it will not require any partners to support or promote Windows or any "middleware" on an exclusive basis (number nine). "We want the developer community to know that it is free to develop, support, and promote products that compete with any part of Windows," the company says in concluding tenet number nine.

The third principle, "Interoperability for Users," takes on similar issues. Tenet number 10, for instance, says it will sell, for a reasonable price, access to the internal "communications protocols" that hook up Windows desktop to Windows Server. (This tenet is also known as the $357 Million Lesson). Number 11 says Microsoft reserves the right to sell access to its patents, while the Twelve Tenets document finishes with a broad commitment to standards.

You can read the Twelve Tenets in its entirety at www.microsoft.com/presspass/newsroom/winxp/windowsprinciples.mspx. Microsoft reserves the right to change them at any time.

The Opinion Part

These are all good principles to follow. It's hard to argue against choice, openness, and cooperation in favor of monolithic, eyeball-gouging, proprietary development.

For example, take tenet number five, which says Microsoft will play fair and won't retaliate against its partners for doing things like installing products that compete with Microsoft products--something it had done in the past. Isn't this kind of like little Johnny taking an oath to not hit little Bobby when he takes the toy shovel? Oh, that's right, this is the corporate software market, not kindergarten--kindergarten is conducted in a much more civil manner.

Microsoft also raised eyebrows with its decision to spell out its policies so clearly in the other tenets. Take the first one, for example. Don't we all assume we can run whatever software we like on our computers, as long as it's used in accordance with its license? Plenty of software makers are deliberately installing software that we don't want on our computers (such as Sony and its root-kit CDs). Who do these computers belong to after all? According to Microsoft, we can rest easy knowing our computers are our own. Thanks, Microsoft.

In fact, all of these tenets follow common sense. The only thing unique about this whole thing is that Microsoft felt the need to spell them out. Some of the things Microsoft says it won't do are illegal, and the rulings of several antitrust lawsuits against Microsoft already require the software giant to behave in ways it previously thought unnecessary.

Of course, the biggest of those rulings expires next year, which is why Microsoft announced its 12 tenets. "People have been asking us, what are we going to do in 2007? What are we going to do when . . . this ruling expires, or at least parts of it?" said Brad Smith, Microsoft's top lawyer, last week. "And the answer is very clear. Through the set of voluntary Windows principles that we are announcing and adopting today, we're taking a principled, transparent, and accountable approach to the future of our operating system."

There's really nothing new and illuminating here. A logical person would assume Microsoft would have learned from its lesson and wouldn't put our federal government and states through more long, drawn-out lawsuits by returning to its predatory business practices. Living and working by such tenets should be considered the least a company like Microsoft should do.

One should understand that these 12 tenets apply only to the desktop version of Windows. So, are we to assume that on the server, anything goes? Considering that Microsoft does not (yet) own a monopoly for server operating systems, perhaps it should elucidate a set of principles that will guide the development of Windows Server.