What the players and observers had to say about a federal judge's order Wednesday to break up Microsoft:"Microsoft, as it is presently organized and led, is unwilling to accept the notion that it broke the law or accede to an order amending its conduct," -- U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson, explaining why he believed the breakup was necessary.
"What's being said today flies in the face of the innovation and low prices that consumers are seeing everyday -- low prices that really arise out of the PC industry and the values that we brought as one of the companies that really fostered the PC phenomenon." -- Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates.
"We are fully confident that at the end of the appellate process we will have been successful in persuading the court that Microsoft's conduct, the challenged conduct in this lawsuit, was not only not anticompetitive, it was pro-competitive. We have been an important part of an industry that has brought better and better technology, more and more quickly to the marketplace at lower and lower prices."-- William Neukom, Microsoft's general counsel.
"Today's ruling will have a profound impact not only by promoting competition in the software industry, but also by reaffirming the importance of antitrust law enforcement in the 21st century and the importance of competition." -- Attorney General Janet Reno.
"When the remedy is implemented -- and this is the key point -- customers, consumers in a free and competitive marketplace will decide for themselves what software they want to purchase. Neither a monopolist nor the government will dictate that choice. -- Assistant Attorney General Joel I. Klein
"Consumers always benefit by competition, they never benefit by monopoly. Consumers, most of all, will have greater choice, they'll have additional products, they may pay lower prices, they probably will have better service. It's classic economics, it's classic antitrust law, and it's the right remedy for innovation." -- Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller.
"Over the past twenty years, no company has done more for consumers and our national economy than Microsoft. We should be working to extend the benefits of technology to every American, not trying to cripple a major technology innovator." -- Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash.
"The judge's opinion is really in keeping with how Microsoft handled this case from the very beginning ... They just kept insisting they never did anything wrong, despite the mountains and mountains of evidence against them." -- Wisconsin Attorney General James Doyle.
"I am concerned about Judge Jackson's decision, not because I believe that Microsoft is completely blameless, but because there are other options that would have far less impact on the company and the economy while still sending a strong signal that anticompetitive behavior will not be tolerated." -- Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.
"California consumers and national consumers will benefit from increased competition in the marketplace" with lower prices and increased innovation. That's good for individual consumers." -- California Attorney General Bill Lockyer.
"Today's unfortunate decision impairs technological innovation. It is incompatible with today's Internet economy and is inconsistent with past rulings by the Federal Court of Appeals." - Rep. Joe Scarborough, R-Fla.
"You have to wonder why the Justice Department tries to fix something that 'ain't broke.' Are we now penalizing people for being successful? There is strong competition in the growing Internet and software markets. Besides that, consumers are paying less and less for products. ... What principle has been violated here?" -- Rep. Henry Bonilla, D-Texas.
"This really vindicates us. It shows that not only did Microsoft compete against us agressively, but that the competition was illegal. Their behavior continues to be reproachful, and the judge felt, rightly, that he needed a strong remedy." -- Jim Barksdale, former chief executive officer of Netscape Communications Corp.