Andrew Gideon wrote:

Anyway, even if you were correct in your assertion that MSFT achieved its
monopoly through reasonable and legal means, that does nothing about the
assertion that they've abused said monopoly.

Or does this distinction still escape you?



It does.

By what means did MS achieve "its monopoly"? Maybe, by making software
everyone chose to use? H'mmmm. Maybe, we're on to something here.

The argument that "no one had any other choice", which you and others
apparently try to make, is intellectually vacant, given that there were
never any market forces preventing potential competitors from entering
the fray and providing competing OSes.

C'mon. Where does this bashing "the ones that make it" ever end? Gates
built a better mousetrap. Get over it. You don't want to use it?
That's fine with me. Load up Linux or something equally as goofy, and
see what software apps there are out there you can run. It's your
choice, big guy. Just don't try to argue that MS is junk simply because
it's the biggest dog on the block. That's not a defensible position.

In my view, MS has done nothing but what any other creative company in
similar circumstances would do - innovate.