[GDC7]

> It's very rare that you see acquisitions work out like this

The acquisition was a normal acquisition.

What made it special was the DOJ stepping in to destroy Microsoft because Bill Gates was essentially too rich and his riches were so talked about that people in DC wanted to show him who's the alpha.

Apple would have gone to zero without Microsoft essentially saving it from bankruptcy, and it would be irrelevant had the DOJ not attacked Microsoft with such vigor.

[dev_tty01]

> DOJ stepping in to destroy Microsoft because Bill Gates was essentially too rich..

That is revisionist. Microsoft got a slap on the wrist. I don't think this gave Apple any tangible benefit. Microsoft's investment was also insignificant. The only thing that really mattered was Microsoft's commitment to continue delivering MS Office for Mac OS. That was a big deal. MS got benefit from Explorer on Mac and for the continued "competition" from Apple to reduce antitrust accusations.

[MBCook]

Spot on. Apple got desperately needed money from the Microsoft investment and more importantly it was a sign that the platform wasn’t “dead“. As Apple had been shrinking big developers had been abandoning the platform. If Microsoft were to stop making office for it it may have killed it.

That investment and commitment helped Apple keep going long enough to get out of the bind it was in.

[GDC7]

> Microsoft got a slap on the wrist

Microsoft gave small users everywhere a free license to use the best GUI OS in the world. Not to mention the browser and the productivity tools

It has always been a free software , unless you are really dedicated and want to pay for it.

It was a really elegant solution, the degree to which you paid for Microsoft products ranged based on each individual user willingness to "look around" for free pirated copies.

And over at Redmond they'd take notice and push the bill onto paying customers such as the Fortune 500 (Exxon, BP, JPMorgan)

If there is one company that the public should love is Microsoft.

[AnimalMuppet]

> ... because Bill Gates was essentially too rich and his riches were so talked about that people in DC wanted to show him who's the alpha.

That's totally not how that happened. Microsoft was doing things that were legitimately anti-competitive, and legitimately against the law. That got proven, and Microsoft's best option was to take the consent decree rather than flat-out lose and let the DOJ have a free hand to write the rules going forward.

[GDC7]

How can you be anticompetitive when your software is free?

Antitrust laws were made to protect the consumer, the same consumer which was robbing Microsoft blind because they allowed piracy.

[macintux]

I don’t believe it was the money that really mattered, but the commitment to provide Office for Mac made a big difference.

[superdug]

Wasn't there some language in the deal about Internet Explorer as well as Office?

[GDC7]

In any event it was state intervention. When that happens the victory/defeat of a company becomes political , not technical or due to financial or business acumen.

The worst thing is that the majority of the American population would have not found themselves competing against Bill Gates for anything, except those in DC who had him as their #1 enemy in order to win their size measuring contest.

Matter of fact the small individual consumer and small businesses were getting away robbing Microsoft blind as they didn't do anything to stop piracy.

Microsoft would just treat it as free marketing or just pass those losses onto big paying customers such as the Fortune 500 companies, thus compensating for piracy losses at the base of the pyramid.

After DOJ intervention nowadays we have Apple shipping a 1700$ phone which is completely closed off and out of the box is impossible to charge while listening to music at the same time. Irony if you think about how passionate Jobs was about music

[eyelidlessness]

Bill Gates and Microsoft are surely grateful for you coming to their defense.