WASHINGTON -- A computer scientist testified Monday that there is no justification for the way Microsoft bundled its Internet software within its dominant Windows operating system.
Edward Felten, a professor at Princeton, told the judge at the Microsoft antitrust trial that the company deliberately blended different computer functions into some of the same Windows files. That essentially makes it impossible to delete all traces of the company's Internet software without affecting the underlying operating system.But Felten, who studied the closely guarded technical blueprints for Windows in a court-ordered examination, showed a 30-minute video describing how he was able to modify some files to prevent Microsoft's Internet software from starting up.
"I know of no reason Microsoft was technologically compelled to design things that way," Felten said. "These files are packages of stuff, and some of the stuff relates to Web browsing and some of it doesn't."
Felten's testimony is important because the government is trying to prove Microsoft illegally tied its Internet software to Windows, in part to protect its monopoly among computer operating systems and also to crush rival Netscape Communications Corp., which makes a popular competing Internet browser.
But Microsoft complained that Felten's method slowed some Windows functions as much as seven-fold.
Microsoft also said the procedure, which deletes some Internet files, made it impossible to test a pre-release copy of its latest Internet software, which was made public earlier this month.
Felten said he hadn't noticed any performance problems. He said his procedure worked with all Microsoft's other updates until he handed over a copy of his removal program to the company.
That raised the eyebrows of U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson, who wondered whether Microsoft made product changes in response to Felten's examination.
Microsoft said outside the courthouse that the problem was coincidental and easily solved: Felten's program deletes an important directory and confuses Microsoft's update software. It said a consumer could manually recreate the directory, a relatively easy process.
Microsoft's questioning of Felten concluded earlier than expected Monday, after the judge chided company lawyer Dave Heiner during one exchange for "playing word games."
"To continue to pursue this in the hope that he will commit a slip of the lip, I don't think is appropriate cross-examination," the judge warned.
Microsoft had said earlier Monday it expected to question Felten over two days. The government said it will show videotaped interviews -- including hours more of lawyers questioning Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates -- the rest of the week. The trial will be recessed Thursday until after the new year.
Felten called the way Microsoft implanted its browser "a question of packaging" rather than a design decision. He said there was no distinction between removing the browser's functions under Windows and actually deleting all the browser's components.
Microsoft contends that distinction is important because it suggests its browser isn't identifiable as a stand-alone piece of software. Antitrust law prohibits companies that have monopolies from tying separate products. Microsoft contends it does not have a monopoly.
Felten compared using an Internet browser to using a tool, such as a screwdriver. But he complained that Microsoft went too far offering its tools.
"They take the next step and glue the screwdriver to my hand," Felten said. "It's hard to use other screwdrivers or use other tools. ... There's no benefit to having a screwdriver glued into my hand."
The judge smiled and answered, "No, I don't think so."