The term “monopolistic practices” is a truly ambiguous concept. The only true monopoly that can exist is that which is mandated by government (cable, telephone, water, electricity). It cannot happen in any other way, because someone can always offer an alternative with government not in the way.
Now, a company can become “like a monopoly” by sheer popularity. Microsoft and Google come close to these in the computer world. But both arrive at their incredible presence because people willing buy their product, which is not mandated to be purchased, by government. Notice how Apple Computer is now coming back, or how Linux is making inroads? Microsoft can be said to have “monopolistic practices” but is certainly not a monopoly, nor is it inherently bad as a “monopolisticly practicing” company.
Get over yourself.
“Microsoft can be said to have ‘monopolistic practices’ but is certainly not a monopoly”
Microsoft is only said to be a monopoly by people who don’t know better and competitors who do know better. Remember that anti-trust case? What charges did they bring against Bill Gates? They said he had participated in unfair trading practices by offering a web browser to the public FOR FREE. How dare he!
"Self" is what a Randite libertian doesn't get over. I'm fine with looking out for others.