Oh, lordy, it's like some sort of beautiful dream: faithful viewer Jens Baumeister informs us that "Redmond Justice" has just taken a turn for the juicier, as the Washington Post reports that Microsoft's strategy during next week's hearing will be to argue that the sanctions sought by the nine holdout states are so fundamentally crippling, the company "would be forced to pull its latest Windows computer operating systems off the market and be unable to develop new systems." (To which, of course, our response is: "And?...")

They're serious, folks! Microsoft is steadfastly claiming that neither Windows XP nor Windows 2000 could be "redesigned to satisfy state demands that they be made available... with and without key programs, such as the Internet Explorer Web browser." Ah, so we're back to that old "IE is an inextricable component of Windows" tune, are we? Sheesh, you'd think we'd have moved past this by now; after all, Microsoft was singing that song back in 1997 when Judge Jackson ordered that a version of Windows 95 (remember Windows 95?) be made available sans IE and Microsoft "complied" by shipping a version of Windows that didn't boot at all. Four years later, we're hearing the very same thing about XP.

Twenty seconds of searching turned up 98lite.net, with a product called "IEradicator" that purports to "remove all versions of Internet Explorer from all versions of Windows 95/98/Me/2000." While we know nothing whatsoever about the product, let's assume for the sake of melodrama that the testimonials are legit and it works as advertised. So those guys can remove IE from Windows, but Microsoft can't? Interesting. And even if IE "can't" be removed from XP, all that means is that Microsoft spent the past four years burying it as deeply as they possibly could, just so they'd be able to make this kind of argument. Here's hoping the judge isn't brain-damaged or high on chemical inhalants next week, because those are the only circumstances in which we can imagine that she'd swallow such tripe.

Seriously, though, this sure smacks of "if you can't play by our rules, we're taking our operating system and going home." Suddenly we're all supposed to blanch at the prospect of a world without Windows; it's a threat, plain and simple, albeit a hilariously ineffectual one to those of us who consider the concept of a Windows-free world to be a majestic paradise. Intent in intent, however, and faithful viewer John Gabel puts it best: "Microsoft is effectively leveraging its monopoly power in an antitrust lawsuit." Will the judge stand for it?