[Dominic Harr]

Do you really think that the Windows OS is the only revenue generating product of Microsoft?

I think that MS doesn't make but a tiny fraction of their sales to consumers. 90% of MS's sales are to OEM's, retailers and corporate IT shops.

And MS is very, very guilty of using coercion to keep those from offering consumers other choices. A mountain of evidence was reviewed by MS-friendly appeals and Supreme courts.

Certainly, crime pays.

And if you're trying to sell the line that MS is the "innocent victim of a vast anti-MS conspiracy", you're going to have to go speak to other MS 'strategic partners' for sympathy.

Because pretty much everyone *not* fiscally tied to MS sees their criminal behavior!

[Bush2000]

And MS is very, very guilty of using coercion to keep those from offering consumers other choices. A mountain of evidence was reviewed by MS-friendly appeals and Supreme courts.

All they had to do was ask Dell. Consumers don't want your alternative crapware. Dell tried offering Linux to consumers. Nobody bought. Sun can't even give away Java to OEMs. Theory debunked.

[PatrioticAmerican]

I am tied to Microsoft, but I have never been coerced into a Microsoft only solution. I have even gone into projects with Microsoft where an Oracle or UNIX server was in play. MS wants it all, but they do play fair.

When computer OEM's were complaining that MS made them pay a fee for each computer sold, regardless if it had an MS OS installed, they should blame themselves. Reason? Those same OEMs were cheating on their reporting to MS what computer had an MS OS installed in order to pay less. Hence, MS simply priced DOS as flat cost per computer sold. MS even lowered the price per computer.

These facts are never presented in the anti-MS argument.