[maximente]

not on its own, but it could help move along anti-trust or whatever litigation: recall that an intel VP was brought in to testify against microsoft in that ordeal, so imagine what effects an insider with (presumably) evidence and an agenda could have.

[bilbo0s]

Well, also recall that nothing happened to M$.

There was no breakup because the courts laughed the government out of the room. In the end, they ended up having to negotiate with M$, and there was an agreement to allow other browsers on M$ operating systems. Basically it was laughable. But the law is the law.

And that would be why we need to change the law. Going after digital companies using laws set up to regulate non-digital companies, is just the height of foolishness. You would think the M$ experience would have taught people? But I guess not.

[wskinner]

In your opinion, what would have been the positive effects of breaking up Microsoft? Other browsers would have beaten explorer more quickly than they did? Something else?

[chiefalchemist]

Seems to me it weakens any agrument as Hughes is not a neutral objective opinion.

Certainly the DoJ can make a solid case sans some outlier.