On Thursday, Microsoft chairman Mr Bill Gates again invoked his favourite emblem of defence, the "i" word - innovation.

But this time, it was used with audible relief, as the company announced it had reached a proposed settlement with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) in its antitrust marathon.

There was even a touch of a quieter, more acquiescent Microsoft: "We recognise that the success of our products has created concerns. This settlement addresses those concerns in a fair . . . manner, enabling Microsoft to continue innovating and pushing technology forward," Mr Gates said.

Ah, yes, innovation. The company endlessly ran the word up the pole during the years spanned by this trial, recognising that it had found a positive, energetic term of great ambiguity.

Microsoft needed the freedom to innovate; innovation benefited customers; innovative new products came from an unrestricted competitive environment.

Reading between the lines: that was just what so much of this trial was about, with its slippery arguments over language, meaning, intent and personality. The very use of the "i" word by Mr Gates, even in contrition, implies a cloaked defiance.

"This settlement will help strengthen our economy during a difficult time, and ensure that our industry can continue delivering innovation," said Mr Gates.

But a company can pursue innovation in many ways, and those ways can raise not just "concerns", to use Mr Gates's term, but enormous worry.

The DOJ's main issue was whether any other operator could have the freedom to innovate in an environment so closely controlled by Microsoft.

That's why several of Microsoft's rivals were quick to criticise what they see as the laxness of Thursday's proposed settlement. The DOJ had won the core issues of its case, all the way through to the highest courts. Microsoft was ready for some serious surgery.

But instead, the new, less aggressive, Bush Jr-era DOJ backed off. Firstly, it announced in September that it would no longer pursue a break-up of the company. This week, it made clear it would not pursue any serious structural or behavioural modification on the part of Microsoft.

Instead, the proposal is suggesting just two punishments: Microsoft must allow computer manufacturers to offer consumers other programs besides Microsoft's, and Microsoft must open up some of its Windows code to rival developers, to create a level playing field for new software applications.

Depending on how these conditions are applied, they could be quite effective, or little more than a ridiculously ineffectual slap on the wrist. More cynical Bush-watchers will guess that the president's DOJ appointees will be unlikely to take a particularly aggressive approach.

And the proposed remedies leave Microsoft to do as it wants with the new version of its operating system, Windows XP. With XP, Microsoft could stake large territorial claims on the internet and move into vast new competitive arenas, such as offering services.

However, there's little indication that the 18 state attorneys general who joined the DOJ in bringing the case will agree to the settlement - discussions foundered on the same issues previously. Also, the EU is showing some teeth in its own approach to antitrust matters, and is snapping at Microsoft.

The existing findings of abusive competitive practice in the case open a slithery can of civil case worms for Microsoft, since aggrieved firms may use those findings to take the company to court.

Nonetheless, the likelihood is that the main case will wrap up sooner rather than later. Microsoft would dearly like this case resolved so it can move forward on other fronts.

The new judge in the case is unlikely to tolerate much foot-dragging from those grumbling attorneys general. And the computing world has changed so significantly that the original case seems nearly anachronistic.

Plus, do we want to hammer a fragile world economy by seriously crippling one of its bigger engines? The reality is most of us are sick of giving Microsoft the opportunity for another "innovation" speech. Put us out of our misery and settle the case now.