Ballmer Defends Microsoft's Actions

"We put a lot of very thoughtful care into these licensing offers," said Ballmer in a speech at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. "The 113 protocols we are offering as part of the consent decree %85 are packaged in a variety of ways so people don't have to [purchase all of them. We are in active discussion with a number of companies about licensing these protocols."

Some observers, citing the communications protocol publishing and licensing effort, say Microsoft is not adhering to the consent decree. The agreement stipulates that Microsoft must publish more technical information for ISVs. To comply, the company said in August that it would publish about 272 previously undisclosed Windows APIs at no charge, and 113 communications protocols on a royalty basis. Some competitors have recently complained about the communications protocols licensing terms and royalties. Sun Microsystems, for one, has registered complaints with U.S. Department of Justice.

Ballmer, however, said his company is "superfocused on 100 percent compliance" with the consent decree. He repeated many times during last week's speech that Microsoft is eager to abide by the consent decree upheld earlier this month by U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly.

"As CEO, I can assure you that Microsoft will give all the time, energy and resources necessary to follow through on our responsibilities," Ballmer said.

Solution providers might not have cared about the communications protocols issue in the past, but many are now paying close attention to interfaces and protocols as they seek to win new business. "We're treading in different waters than we have before and are doing more customized software and hardware," said Grady Crunk, executive vice president at Central Data, Titusville, Fla.

Lawrence Souza, president of Maximum Micro, South Yarmouth, Mass., said access to the protocols will likely benefit solution providers that deal with mixed Windows, Unix, Linux and NetWare server environments.

One analyst said open-source developers may have problems with Microsoft's licensing terms, but that's not necessarily a violation of the consent decree. "Microsoft has to give [developers access and be reasonable with charges, but they don't have to give up ownership," said Rob Enderle, a research fellow at Giga Information Group. "This could be a real problem given the General Public License," which dictates that open-source applications can be viewed, modified and redistributed, he said.