In just-released written testimony, Allchin said a program written by Edward Felten, a Princeton University assistant professor, did not remove browser functions from Windows as Felten had claimed. He also called Felten's program a "Rube Goldberg mechanism" that "seriously degrades the performance and functionality of the operating system in numerous respects."
Microsoft, however, sought to suppress a report of tests it performed on Felten's program that confirmed the Princeton's professor assertion that some software code shared by Windows and the browser could be separated "into two parts," according to court papers filed by the Justice Department (DOJ).
Microsoft employee David D'Souza was asked by Allchin to "test Felten's efficiency Microsoft, assertions, and did just that," the court papers said. Microsoft now claims that D'Souza's conclusions are privileged and can't be revealed in court, the court papers said.
U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson scheduled a hearing on the issue tomorrow.
Allchin's attack on Felten's testimony supports the company position that it did not illegally tie its Internet Explorer browser to Windows and that the browsing technology is an integral part of the operating system. The government charges Microsoft welded the products together in an attempt to squelch competition from a rival browser that could be developed to run a variety of software in much the same manner an operating system does.
Microsoft's Windows runs 90 percent of the world's personal computers.
Allchin said that while Felten's program modified Windows 98 to hide some of its Web-browsing functions, it also "renders various features of the operating system inoperable," reduces certain Windows functions' performance by as much as 700 percent, and causes problems loading Internet Explorer 4.0 onto Windows computers.
Allchin is the next witness scheduled to take the stand in his company's defense in the antitrust case by the Justice Department and 19 states. He is not expected to testify until Monday.
"Dr. Felten's testimony says nothing about the extent to which the Internet Explorer technologies in Windows 98 are a useful, integrated part of the operating system," Allchin said.
The broad theme of Allchin's testimony is that Microsoft was trying to help consumers when it knitted Web browsing capabilities into the Windows operating system.
Allchin said designing operating systems to tap into the Internet creates a more efficient product and that other software makers are doing the same thing.
"Integration is a holy grail of software development...Two types of functionality, previously separate, are being integrated in a new product or a new version of an existing product to make them work better together," Allchin said.
He listed Apple Computer, IBM, Sun Microsystems, and Be among the businesses that are integrating Internet access functions into operating systems.
He disputed government claims that Microsoft illegally joined Internet Explorer browser to Windows to kill competition from Netscape Communications' Navigator browser. Netscape hadn't even been incorporated when Microsoft first contemplated joining the products, he said.
Allchin, who joined Microsoft in 1990, gave testimony that focuses on an argument the company successfully used in a separate but related case decided in June by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. In interpreting an earlier consent decree between the Justice Department and Microsoft, the appeals court said Microsoft could integrate two products if that combination benefited consumers.
That language, though, wasn't central to the appeals court's ruling and the court was careful to say it was only defining the terms of the consent decree. The three-judge panel unanimously held that Judge Jackson, who also will decide the current antitrust case against Microsoft, overstepped his authority in ordering the company to stop linking sales of its browser with Windows without giving the company a chance to respond.
Allchin's written testimony is in line with the appeals court's reasoning.
"We believe that the tight integration of Internet Explorer technologies into Windows benefits customers, developers and computer manufacturers in ways that simply cannot be achieved through the use of add-on products from third parties," Allchin said.
Hoping to convince Jackson that Microsoft did not act illegally, he addressed the motivations for integrating Internet Explorer into Windows. Microsoft wasn't trying to subvert the success of Netscape's Navigator, Allchin testified, pointing to an April 6, 1994, meeting between himself, Bill Gates, and about 20 other company executives at which the desirability of integrating Web-browsing functions into Windows was discussed.
Netscape was formed in April 1994 and released a test version of Navigator on the Web in October.
"When Netscape was little more than a gleam in the eyes of its founders, Microsoft had already decided that future versions of its operating system software should include Web-browsing capability," he said.
Copyright 1999, Bloomberg L.P. All Rights Reserved.