The Microsoft v. US Government case is one of the most famous antitrust cases in US history. Microsoft Corporations was originally founded as a software programming company in 1975. As the company grew, it discovered unique value in its operating system. This asset has massively contributed to the company's successful growth in the desktop PC sector. This success allowed thousands of workers within the company to become millionaires. Before Microsoft entered its field of success through innovative ideas and remarkable market vision, they faced strong competitive forces like IBM's OS/2 system. In 1994, the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit against Microsoft, claiming that Microsoft had an exclusive right. contract with original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), which is anti-competitive and allows Microsoft to maintain its monopoly on PC operating systems. A settlement was reached that prohibited Microsoft from making integrated products and limited its licensing activities by not linking software products together. In 1997, the DOJ returned to court stating that Microsoft had violated the consent decree because Microsoft, to keep pace with new competition, had tied Internet Explorer to its operating system. This violates the decree. The DOJ prevailed in district court. The case was then taken to the Court of Appeal. The case involved the Department of Justice, attorneys general of 20 states and the District of Columbia, where they were suing Microsoft for monopolizing the operating system market, entering into anticompetitive contracts with OEMs, attempting to monopolize the market Internet browsers and for having integrated their Web browser with their operating system. Microsoft was found responsible ... middle of paper ...... the way OEMs significantly change Windows and for customers to choose a browser. The deal helped competition as well as consumers. Ten years after the case, the Justice Department said that nearly all desktop middleware markets, from Web browsers to instant messaging to media player software, are more competitive today than they were at the time. where the final judgment was rendered. In conclusion, the government behaved appropriately, as it really was. strict in changing the way Microsoft did business with its competitors. I commend the government for not attacking Microsoft's ingenious innovative techniques and its right to compete aggressively. The government came out on top in this matter because it was able to correctly analyze every detail. Looking back on this case, Bill Gates has proven himself to be a shark in whatever deal he is involved in and his criminal record is not one to play with..