Microsoft witness says antitrust plan to hurt consumers

Forcing Microsoft Corp to redesign its Windows operating system as state antitrust enforcers demand would mean higher prices for consumers, an economist testified.

Kenneth Elzinga, a University of Virginia economist, testified for the world's biggest software maker against nine states' proposals for tougher remedies than Microsoft agreed to accept in a settlement to end the US government's four-year-old case.

The states want a federal judge to order a stripped-down version of Windows that would permit easy removal by computer makers of programs like Internet Explorer.

"All of the fundamental changes" in Windows "would entail the expenditure of hundreds of millions of dollars, or more, for the creation of versions of Windows that are less functional and feature-rich," Elzinga said. The increased costs for the redesign means consumers would pay more, he said.

Elzinga the 17th witness Microsoft called to testify against the states' proposals in hearings conducted by US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly.

An court that upheld findings that Microsoft illegally protected its Windows monopoly ordered the hearings, now in their eighth week.

The hearings are expected to conclude next week. Microsoft will present testimony from University of Colorado scientist John Bennett before the states offer two rebuttal witnesses. After the hearings conclude, the judge said she would consider legal arguments in court and in the form of written motions.

States' lawyer Steven Kuney challenged Elzinga's testimony that the settlement's requirement that Microsoft let computer makers hide access to Internet Explorer, instead of removing the program code, would remedy findings the company commingled browser and operating system files to quash competition.

"Do you have any reason to believe that Microsoft has stopped that conduct?'' Kuney asked.