Peter Rogers, IT infrastructure manager, Southcorp: "It's a decision we've been wanting for some time. "Microsoft seems to have a strong market share and monopoly, and the user community has suffered commercially."
Ron Chambers, CIO, Ansett Australia: "It would be better if its products were unbundled, as we could negotiate better prices elsewhere."
Paul Spiteri, general manager of IT, Wattyl Australia: "In the longer term there is a potential for an effect, depending on the final ruling of the court and the initiatives and capabilities of Microsoft's competitors who will be rubbing their hands together with glee."
Brian O'Connor, general manager IS, BBC Hardware: "The fact that Microsoft has been found to be a monopoly does not concern me, as its products have already become the de facto standard. What concerns me is how it continues to derive additional funds from its licensing structure."
An IT coordinator for a leading manufacturer: "It will be interesting to see the final outcome. [But] I'm not convinced it will go to the extent of [the company being broken up]."
Keith Waller, IS manager, United Construction: The judge's conclusions were "reasonably valid [because consumers] are forced to follow whatever Microsoft says."
John Guerra, development manager at Pacific Dunlop: "It's an interesting ruling. If it leads to more creativity amongst smaller companies it's a good thing, but will those smaller companies have the resources to put into R&D that Microsoft does?"