<Our resident engineer who thinks he understands economics simply does not grasp the importance of antitrust laws in preserving the free market. Obviously, once the microsoft monopoly is someday broken there will be much higher quality operating systems and software for much lower (competitive) prices than today.

For the record, I don't have a degree in engineering any more than I have a degree in economics. To some extent, this may be why my thinking hasn't ossified. I'm not going to try to beat to death the "antitrust is the savior of the free market" myth. Anyone who is interested can check out the refs at the bottom. They're too deep for me, since I only think I understand economics.

I would be fascinated to see the rationale for assuming that wonderful operating systems and software will come out of the woodwork once Microsoft is destroyed. Who will create them? Where are all these geniuses now? I paid about $250 for a clean install of Windows 2000. Is this too high? How much do you think an operating system should cost? If Microsoft is overcharging for software, why is it so hard for competitors to underprice them? Are you using a Mac? Linux? If you are, how is that possible under this horrible monopoly? If you are not, why not? Did Bill Gates come to your house with enforcement agents to make you buy Microsoft? Or maybe Microsoft just does the job better?

It's interesting that a large number of liberals are terrified of Giant Evil Corporations getting too much power, but are happy as a pig in mud with the government gaining massive control over almost every aspect of our lives. The government has a legal monopoly on many things, like delivering first class mail and our retirement program to name just two. All of us are forced to participate under threat of imprisonment, yet this is just fine with liberals. The Government is Our Pal, after all. And anyone who thinks that just because they come up for a vote once in a while, that this gives us "control," is naive in the extreme.

Antitrust is not about preserving competition, any more than Social Security is about providing for retired people. It is a weapon the government uses to obliterate or chain those parts of the private sector that it sees as threatening to its own power. The fact that the internet is not taxed and controlled by the State is still a major burr in Washington's butt.

References (like anyone is actually going to read them):

http://ios.org/pubs/Article14.asp

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg20n2a.html

http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb105-39.html

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa405.pdf