[AaronAnderson]

M$ makes 85% profit margin on operating system with 90% market share +.

M$ makes 78% profit margin on office products with 80% + marketshare.

M$ loses money in markets where it does not have monopoly powers thus must perpetuate monopoly to remain profitable

M$ was found liable for using anticompetitive tactics that inhibited competitors from entering in the ludicrous marketplace

---

Bottom line, consumers have less choice, less innovation, and higher prices

If you expect me to believe that any one company can create a product that fullfills everyones needs all the time at the lowest possible price without any competition from the goodness of their hearts, I will have to point you to the fact that M$ appearently looses in every market they have genuine competition in. I am afraid the boys in Redmond seemingly cannot fullfill your promise of the best functionality for the lowest price in every arena.

This is a blow to us who believe that M$ uses their OS monopoly to force their inferior products on end users; Even with their 90% + OS marketshare they still cannot force their other offerings profitable.

[SlickWillard]

If you expect me to believe that any one company can create a product that fullfills everyones needs all the time at the lowest possible price without any competition from the goodness of their hearts, I will have to point you to the fact that M$ appearently looses in every market they have genuine competition in.

Like I said before, if you just can't stomach Microsoft's products, there's a world of competition to choose from:

1) NeXTSTEP/OpenSTEP/MAC OSX
2) Red Hat
3) FreeBSD
4) OpenBSD
5) NetBSD
6) Solaris
7) ad nauseum...

Is Solaris a fraud? Is Linus Thorvalds a poseur? Is Theo de Raadt a script kiddie? Do none of these operating systems provide genuine competition?