Tech is messy. It's built on a graveyard of dead standards and forgotten rivals. If you've been around long enough, you know the phrase. Embrace extend and extinguish. It sounds like something out of a mid-90s spy thriller, but for the Department of Justice back in the day, it was a very real roadmap for how Microsoft allegedly played the game.
It worked. Sorta.
At its core, the strategy is about taking something everyone uses—an open standard—and making it your own until the original is basically useless. You start by supporting the standard. That's the "embrace" part. Then you add your own "special sauce" that only works in your software. That’s the "extend." Eventually, the industry moves to your version because it has the features, and the original standard just... dies. That's the "extinguish."
The Memo That Started It All
We aren't guessing about this. This isn't some basement-dwelling conspiracy theory. Internal Microsoft documents, famously unearthed during the United States v. Microsoft Corp. antitrust trial in the late 90s, laid it out in black and white.
Paul Maritz, a high-ranking executive at the time, was a key figure here. The strategy was explicitly used to describe how they planned to deal with Netscape and the rising threat of the open web. Think back to 1995. The internet was a Wild West. Netscape Navigator was the king. Microsoft was late to the party.
To catch up, they didn't just build a better browser. They used the leverage of the Windows operating system.
📖 Related: Apple Store Menlo Park Edison NJ: What to Know Before You Head to the Mall
How it actually looked in practice
Take HTML. It was meant to be universal. But then Microsoft introduced Internet Explorer and added proprietary tags that only IE could read. If a web developer wanted their site to look good for the 90% of people using Windows, they had to use Microsoft’s tags.
Suddenly, a "universal" website didn't work on Netscape anymore.
It wasn't just browsers. Java was a huge target. Sun Microsystems designed Java to be "Write Once, Run Anywhere." That was a direct threat to Windows. If apps could run on any OS, why pay the "Windows tax"? Microsoft’s response was classic embrace extend and extinguish. They licensed Java, then "extended" it with Windows-specific hooks. If a developer used those hooks, their app only worked on Windows. The "Run Anywhere" promise was broken. Sun sued. Microsoft eventually lost that one, but by then, the momentum had shifted.
Is this just a Microsoft story?
Hardly.
While Microsoft became the poster child for this during the Bill Gates era, the DNA of this tactic is everywhere. You see it in how big platforms handle APIs today. You see it in how "walled gardens" are built.
- Google and Chrome: Critics argue Google does a modern version of this with "Web Integrity" or "Manifest V3." They embrace the open web but steer it toward standards that favor their ad-tracking or performance needs.
- Apple: The iMessage "blue bubble vs. green bubble" is a social version of extension. They take a standard (SMS/RCS) and layer proprietary features on top that make the standard version feel broken or inferior.
- Open Source: Companies often "fork" open-source projects. They take the free code, add proprietary features, and eventually, the community version loses its relevance because the corporate version is "better," even if it’s less free.
The irony? Microsoft is now the champion of open source. They own GitHub. They contribute to Linux. Times change, or maybe the strategy just got more subtle.
The DOJ and the Fallout
The 1998 antitrust trial was a circus. Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson eventually ruled that Microsoft was a monopoly. The findings of fact specifically pointed out that Microsoft used its "extension" of standards to crush competition.
They were almost broken up into two companies.
They escaped that fate, but the company’s culture was forced to pivot. It’s why we have things like the "Interoperability Principles" now. But honestly, the damage to the idea of a "free and open web" was done. It taught every other tech giant that if you own the platform, you can own the rules.
Why should you care in 2026?
Because we're seeing it again with AI.
Right now, there's a rush to "embrace" open models. But look closely at how the big players are integrating them. They are wrapping open-source models in proprietary layers. They are "extending" the functionality with closed-source data sets. If we aren't careful, the "open" part of AI will just be a marketing hook to get us into a new set of proprietary ecosystems.
How to spot the pattern
If you’re a developer or a tech-savvy consumer, keep your eyes open for these red flags:
- The "Plus" Trap: A company adopts an open standard but adds "Standard Plus" features that only work in their app.
- API Drifts: The public API stays the same, but the internal "optimized" API for the company's own products gets all the speed.
- Dependency Hooks: The software is "free" but requires a specific, paid cloud service to function correctly.
Basically, whenever someone says they are "improving" a universal standard, ask who that improvement actually benefits. If it only benefits the person selling you the software, you’re probably looking at the "extend" phase.
Moving Forward: Actionable Insights
The ghost of embrace extend and extinguish isn't going away. It's just a part of how dominant firms protect their moat. But you aren't powerless.
- Support True Standards: When choosing tools, prioritize those that use open-source protocols without proprietary "flavors." Think Matrix for messaging or ODF for documents.
- Audit Your Stack: If you're a business, look at your software dependencies. If 80% of your workflow relies on a "feature" that only exists in one vendor’s version of an open standard, you're locked in.
- Advocate for Interoperability: Support legislation that mandates data portability and open APIs. The only way to stop an "extinguish" move is to ensure the "extension" can be used by everyone.
- Diversify: Don't let one ecosystem own your data. Use cross-platform tools whenever possible. If it only works on Windows, or only on Mac, or only in Chrome, it's a risk.
The history of tech is a cycle. We move from open to closed and back again. Understanding these tactics doesn't just make you a better consumer; it helps you build a more resilient digital life. Keep the standards open. Keep the web weird. Don't let the extensions become the cage.