Like many, you focus on only one part of the story - the pure definiton of what a monopoly is supposed to be. Don't forget that a large part of this case is predicated on anti-competitive practices as well.

Forget for a moment about what you may think is right or wrong. Tell me, can you buy an intel-based machine today - right off the shelve - packaged with another OS other than Windows - complete with application software?

The answer is no.

As a whole company, MS by itself, is not a monopoly. However, when it comes to OS's, MS Windows is a de-facto monopoly. And as such, MS has Monopoly power. They control what happens to Windows. OEM/ISV's are very much dependent on what MS does. It would be very easy for MS to twist the arms of folks to do what they want - hence - the comitting of anti-competitive acts. Do you really think a lot of this is hard to prove? As far as the browser issue goes - the browser itself is meaningless. However, the issue does illustrate the lengths that MS has gone to protect it's position.

For anybody to think that MS has not been - for the lack of a better term - agressive at times - has his/her head in the sand. Too many e-mails have been made public to show just how over the top some MS managers have been willing to go.

Do I think MS is an evil empire - do I think Bill Gates is the Borg?
No.

Do I think they at times have been extremely aggressive?
Yes.

As a developer, have a I benefited from the control that MS has over the OS?
Yes

Do I think there is some merit to the Gov'ts case?
Yes.

Do I think the company should be broken up?
Too early to tell at this point..
But, if I were pressed for an answer - then No.

Do I think MS own counter-proposal is sufficent?
No.


All that said, please stop with the generic citing of college texts and strict defintions found in the dictionary. If it were that cut and dry, this case would have been over in a week....









>
If I remember correctly from my college econ texts, monopoly power is derived from having exclusive rights to a resource, or purposely limiting supply to raise prices. IMO Microsoft is guilty of neither. The moral of story is: "You can get big, but don't get too big"