RealNetworks recently filed a lawsuit against Microsoft for allegedly monopolizing the multimedia player market through its Windows operating systems.  I think RealNetworks has a bit to learn about how the market works and why their products aren’t doing so well.

I’ve grown weary of the Microsoft-bashing mentality that has run rampant in the technology industry.  Many PC-industry companies view Microsoft as an easy way to make a lot of money, so they abuse the legal system and file lawsuit after lawsuit in the hopes that either Bill Gates and crew will settle or a judge or jury will be swayed by all the anti-Microsoft hype and will order Microsoft to write yet another check.

If one were to look at the situation objectively, it becomes increasingly clear that many companies in this industry cannot support their own business models, cannot legitimately compete with Microsoft, and continue to make inferior products whilst blaming their falling market shares on the Redmond-based software giant.

Don’t get me wrong — I’m not a Microsoft zealot.  I work with Microsoft products every day and have done so for many years, and I will be the first to say that they are often full of security holes, use default configurations which are nothing more than invitations for someone to break in, offer very little flexibility when it comes to how people work and use computers, and suffer from a myriad of other shortcomings and problems.

That having been said, however, I am a pragmatist.  Many of the companies which have seen fit to take Microsoft to court recently are poorly run businesses which offer inferior products or abuse the computing public and wonder why their products fail.

RealNetworks falls into both of those categories.

Running to the federal court in San Jose, CA, RealNetworks is simply stomping its feet and hoping to get on the let’s-sue-Microsoft gravy train.  I would hope they could focus that effort on improving their products and removing the invasive code that commandeers a person’s PC when installed.

The RealNetworks formats have never impressed me.  I have often found the Quicktime or Windows Media Player versions of multimedia files to offer better audio and video.  In addition, the RealNetworks player is not user friendly and is extremely cumbersome to the average netizen.  And don’t get me started on the RealOne player, a wholly unnecessary piece of bloatware — or should I say malware? — that is laughably one of the most horrific attempts at software development ever created.

When you install a RealNetworks player, unless you are technically proficient and have plenty of time to chase down everything the software wants to change, it unreservedly steals file associates, installs automatically-loaded junk in the system tray, attempts to contact the RealNetworks servers on a horrifyingly regular basis (with no indication of what it’s communicating so often and unnecessarily), and barrages the user with superfluous messages from RealNetworks about paying to upgrade to their premium service (among other extraneous junk that it constantly pushed into your face).

To add insult to injury, the RealOne player is as inelegant a piece of software as I have ever seen.  It’s simply not suitable for manufacture or distribution, not to mention use.  The interface is kludgy and inexplicably complicated for the average computer user.  In fact, one can easily call it Byzantine, especially once an attempt has been made to get through all of the preferences.

Oh, and there’s that little issue of having been bundled with AOL for a long time that raises questions about RealNetworks’ lack of character.  You are, after all, known by the company you keep — and AOL is simply the poorest company one can keep.

But the technical considerations are the core of the problem RealNetworks is attempting to solve with this lawsuit.  A bad product with a bad implementation with a bad media format with in-your-face marketing and unrelentingly invasive software all add up to a sagging bottom line for the company.  And this is where the truth can be found.

Just consider what RealNetworks chairman and chief executive Rob Glaser said in a statement regarding the legal action: "While we much prefer competing in the market — as we are doing and have done for nine years — our board has made a carefully considered business decision to take this action to end Microsoft’s illegal conduct and recover substantial damages on behalf of our shareholders."

It strikes me as odd that he has to point out that RealNetworks is in fact competing in the market.  Yes, technically they are, but the competition is similar to selling Lexus and Hyundai in the middle of an affluent neighborhood and wondering why the Hyundai vehicles never leave the lot.

If you look at his statement objectively, you can’t help but take special note of the "substantial damages" remark.  I suppose, if my business were faltering due to bad products and apparently bad management, I too would look for a company with deep pockets that I could sue for "substantial damages."

Given Microsoft’s bad luck of late, now is the time to take advantage of a biased population which has been force fed overwhelming amounts of anti-Microsoft propaganda (all from its competitors, but they don’t advertise that fact).

I think it’s time for the technology industry to stop earning a living off of legal attacks against Microsoft and to start dealing with the underlying problems which force them to seek "theft by litigation" solutions.

Despite RealNetworks’ meretricious arguments to the contrary, this lawsuit is intended solely to derogate from competing legitimately (and, perhaps, designing a decent product for once) in favor of demonstrating once again that even an otiose business model and line of products can be overcome by strategic litigation.

Sounds like The SCO Group to me.  But I shall save that laughable story for another day.