Editing IBM Lotus SmartSuite (section)

==IBM vs Microsoft==
In his [[finding of facts]] in ''[[United States v. Microsoft]]'', [[Thomas Penfield Jackson|Judge Jackson]] determined that because of IBM's marketing of Lotus SmartSuite, and other alternatives to Microsoft products (like [[World Book Encyclopedia|World Book electronic encyclopedia]] instead of Microsoft's [[Encarta]]<ref>{{citation|url =https://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm|title=Court's finding of fact|date=14 August 2015 |publisher=United States Department of Justice}}, Sec. 127. November 5, 1999</ref>), Microsoft "punished the IBM PC Company with higher prices, a late license for Windows 95, and the withholding of technical and marketing support."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.cnet.com/Full+text+of+Judge+Jacksons+findings+of+fact+-+page+23/2009-1001_3-232571-23.html|title=Full text of Judge Jackson's findings of fact|publisher=[[CNet]]}}, Sec. 116. January 2007</ref>

Microsoft did not grant IBM [[Original Equipment Manufacturer|OEM]] rights for Windows 95 until 15 minutes prior to the release of Windows 95, August 24, 1995. Because of this uncertainty, IBM machines were sold without Windows 95, while [[Compaq]], [[Hewlett-Packard|HP]], and other indulgent companies sold machines with Windows 95 from day one.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.cnet.com/Full+text+of+Judge+Jacksons+findings+of+fact+-+page+25/2009-1001_3-232571-25.html?tag=st.next|title=Full text of Judge Jackson's findings of fact|publisher=[[CNet]]}}, Sec. 125. January 2007</ref>