Replies

Microsoft COMPETES, and does it well, and that is called free market economics buddy!

Actually, what MicroSoft does is inimical to Free Market Economics as espoused by F. A. Hayek and Friedman, two of the greatest Free Market Economists this country has ever known.
They both hold that monopolies that limit choice are bad for free markets, akin to Socialist government control of resources.
You seem to be telling me you know more than they do. I'm impressed.
Please explain why limiting choice and eliminating competition is good for free markets.
Sounds positively Keynsian.

They don't limit choice. You can buy Apple, Linux, Palm, whatever. Crikey, you can get a Linux desktop with Star Office FOR FREE these days, and if that isn't competition I don't know what is.

Microsoft will always have competitors. It is funny how their competitive efforts get described as "anti competitive". Sun, Oracle, and the rest of them are still in business. IBM is still a massive competitor to MS in the several arenas.

It's like criticising Wal-Mart for shutting down mom-and-pop shops. Wal-Mart does a better job because of their scale.

There ARE companies that successfully compete with MS. They are Adobe, Intuit, Macromedia, the list goes on and on. Significantly, they don't spend nearly as much money as Sun and Oracle on litigation, instead they focus on making great products.

There are plenty of areas to compete with MS. The fight for mobile device software is still wide open. It is up to other companies to successfully compete in this arena.