It’s not that straight forward, Apple was bleeding employees up until that cash settlement. Maybe Microsoft would have lost the lawsuit, but with our legal system nothing is a lock and even then, Microsoft could have kept it in courts for another decade using their cash to force Apple to burn their dollars fighting appeals.
You cannot deny that at that time, the worst thing for Microsoft would have been for the at-the-time weak Apple to have left the market.
I don’t want to beat a dead horse but Apple was not doing well and Microsoft for their own purposes were better off with a weak Apple than no Apple.
Now nearly a decade and a half later, Microsoft may be wondering if they would have been better off taking their chances with the Feds, LOL.
It’s not that straight forward ...
Ummmm..., it was certainly "that straightforward" -- but probably not in the way you're thinking.
It was "that straightforward" as soon as Steve Jobs came back to the company. There's the key to the whole thing -- right there...
At that point (even though there was a settlement with Microsoft for their stealing of Apple code), it wouldn't have made any difference in regards to a settlement -- with Steve Jobs running the show from that point forward. :-)
Jobs has now instilled "right thinking" back into the company, which was unfortunately hampered prior to that time, by people who didn't know how to "think different"
I do have to agree with you. Many employees were leaving Apple at the time... although my recollection was the partings were voluntary, not enforced lay-offs from Apple. Apple was hurting. They had over 30 different models of Apple Macs on the market at the same time, there were 140 Mac clone makers world wide sucking profits away from Apple, and Apple had no clear direction from the top. Steve Jobs was brought back as interim CEO to clean up the mess.
Motives aside, the lawsuit settlement agreements are explicit. I think it was in both corporations best interests to clear the decks... but the $150 million was not a bailout. At best it was an opportunity for breathing space. . . and allowed Jobs time to focus his energies on re-directing Apple.
Apple NEEDED Microsoft Office for Mac to be continued. Microsoft needed Apple as competition for appearances sake as they went into both congressional hearings and court. Jobs used Microsoft's poor political position as leverage to settle the lawsuit to Apple's advantage.
The settlement was VERY lopsided on Apple's behalf: $150 million for a piece of paper granting VERY restricted partial interest in Apple (preferred Stock — less than 3% of the value of Apple at the time, IIRC), without any management clout (no-voting power=no management decisions for MS which is highly unusual if this were a bail-out), perpetual rights to specific MS intellectual properties at no cost to Apple, limited grants to MS of Apple intellectual properties for yearly cash payments to Apple from MS, permission for MS to include Internet Explorer along with Netscape in the Apple OS distributions but not exclusivity for just five years... and MS contractually required to maintain and continue development of MS Office for Mac for five years. That's was REALLY lopsided. Both corporations elected to spin it as a mutual aggrandizement pact... for appearances sake. The agreements were sealed for five years with the court's approval. Steve and Bill put on their Dog and Pony Show of sweetness and light, and went about their businesses.
Interestingly, when the agreement's five year life expired, Microsoft dropped all development of Internet Explorer for Mac OS X... but continued development of OS X Office for OSX because it was a cash cow for them... adding significantly to MS's bottom line. Apple dropped IE from inclusion of IE from distribution disks as soon as the 5 years agreement concluded.
That being said, I think that Star Traveler was referring to the current recession when he spoke about no layoffs or bail-outs... not the ancient history that we are discussing here, :^)>