I wasn’t going to write about former Microsoft VP Dick Brass’ NYT Op-ed piece, “Microsoft’s Creative Destruction“. But there is a point that keeps coming up, and although it doesn’t have anything directly to do with Free Software, I feel loquacious today.

ClearType

Among the other claims in the piece, Mr. Brass makes much hay out of ClearType, which he claims was invented at Microsoft under his tenure by a “group of very clever graphics experts” – but it wasn’t initially promoted properly because of inter-company turf wars.

In rebutal, the Official Microsoft Blog has responded, and in fact points to ClearType as a great example of “innovation with impact”, an “example of how it works well”.

Of course, the funny part of it all is that sub-pixel rendering was first patented by IBM back in 1988 (a full decade before Microsoft’s ClearType), and the technique was also well-known for increasing resolution on the Apple II back in 1976.

Other stuff: Playing Monopoly

It’s interesting that the official Microsoft Blog didn’t address some of the other interesting claims from Mr. Brass.

Take for example his assertion that Microsoft is “at worst” a “highly repentant, largely accidental monopolist”. Largely accidental? First off, I question the idea that a company can “accidentally” stumble into monopolizing an industry. Secondly, we have reams of documentation (like Comes v. Microsoft) that show Microsoft at all levels is deadly serious about eliminating competition, regardless of the means.

Even if you accept “highly repentant” – which I emphatically do not – Microsoft certainly did not become a monopoly largely by accident.

Other Stuff: Sustaining Economy

Another interesting assertion by Mr. Brass is that Microsoft “helps sustain the economies of Seattle, Washington State and the nation as a whole.”

Perhaps Mr. Brass is not aware of the $1 Billion Microsoft Tax Dodge? Or the over $650 Million in tax breaks Microsoft recieves? That’s just at the state level.

Microsoft behavior world-wide is similar. It paid out 0.04% tax in Ireland, where “much of Microsoft’s international profits are channeled”. Microsoft has also suggested that changes to prevent such channeling would mean moving employees offshore.

The point of course, is that Microsoft isn’t “helping to sustain” anything but its own profit margin. How much (or little) taxes it pays is a cost of doing business, not a virtue of some sort.

Other Stuff: Even more random craziness

Mr. Brass make several other assertions. He says an important question is why Microsoft “no longer brings us the future”. I don’t think Microsoft has ever “brought us the future”. To be kind, Microsoft used to occasionally bring us the future that someone else developed. Now they don’t even do that.