Bill Gates can stop worrying about his new advertising campaign including products with the names “Micro” and “Soft.”

On Friday, the U.S. Justice Department and the big evil known as Microsoft reached an anti-trust agreement that sets restrictions on how the software company deals with competitors. The one-year struggle included the possibility of splitting the massive company into several mini-companies, but that idea lost its momentum.

Did Microsoft get off easy? Sort of. Will the government truly enforce the computer giant’s new restrictions? Herein lies the question.

In reality, Microsoft could have and would have won over competitors even if it ran under three different names. But in our capitalist society, competition is the name of the game.

With this decision, for instance, computer users will notice the biggest change when they boot up their computers. Now, Microsoft has to allow other computer companies the right to decide what desktop software comes with their system. AOL’s Netscape and Windows Media Player could replace Internet Explorer and RealNetwork’s audio and video player.

What the government needs to do is keep its eyes on dirty business rather than splitting up private companies or requiring them to divulge their software secrets to their competitors. A three-member compliance board is responsible for keeping a watchful eye over Microsoft’s plans if the anti-trust law is approved. That may be an endless job, but a necessary one and the most useful part of this proposal.

A group of 18 states suing Microsoft has until Tuesday to accept the settlement or continue to fight a battle that’s gone on long enough. Considering the current state of our country’s affairs, we suggest that those states take the offer and support small businesses, if that’s what their intention was in the first place.