Lawyers for both the US government and Microsoft, on Tuesday, submitted their respective proposed "findings of fact" as part of the Microsoft antitrust trial.

The software giant says it continues to face challenges in a swiftly changing industry while the Justice Department (DoJ) and 19 states, on the other hand, argues there is abundant support in the testimony for their charge that Microsoft holds a monopoly in the desktop operating systems market.

Both the DoJ and Microsoft have posted their respective findings on their Web sites. The government's document, which totalled nearly 800 pages, dismisses the importance to the case of Netscape's acquisition by America Online (AOL). It contends that Netscape was acquired because it had been damaged by Microsoft's campaign. "AOL acquired Netscape despite the browser business, not because of it," the document reads.

Microsoft's finding, which runs to about 400 pages, argues that the DoJ has failed to prove some of the key circumstances of its antitrust lawsuit filed in May, 1998. In particular, Microsoft claims the government has failed to support its claim that the software giant illegally "tied" its Internet Explorer browser to its Windows operating system, in an attempt to harm rival Netscape.

Microsoft also asserts in its filing that the DoJ failed to show that the software vendor's behaviour harmed consumers. The DoJ alleges that Microsoft's conduct harmed not only competitors but also consumers. The DoJ specifically alleges that consumers lost out in terms of choice, innovation and pricing.

"For a long time now, and, if Microsoft's actions to maintain its monopoly are not halted, for well into the future, personal computer consumers are locked into a Microsoft world, one in which a single company essentially controls the configuration of desktop computing," the government's finding of fact document states.

The findings of fact on both sides were limited to the scope of the written testimony submitted during the case. As anticipated, Microsoft rejected all allegations of wrongdoing in its filing. The proposed finding of fact argues that the government has failed to prove any of its claims. Microsoft did concede that the company sometimes used strong language in its dealings with competitors but that doesn't equate to breaking the law.

As it did during the trial, Microsoft pointed to alternative operating systems, specifically mentioning Linux, Java, BeOS, OS/2 and AOL, to attack the government's monopoly charge.

Summarising each sides' version of events, the 1,200-page briefs disclosed little that is new. The two sides are scheduled to reappear in court on 21 September.