it's just that most people choose to buy Microsoft's operating systems. You can get a good operating system from Apple (OS X), Sun (Solaris), Compaq (Tru64 Unix), IBM (AIX or AS/400), many flavors of Linux, and so on. If Microsoft has built a product that more people want to use, is that grounds for legal harassment and punishment? You can download Linux for free or buy a distribution for a nominal cost. It's a damned good OS and getting better all the time. Still, most people choose not to use it instead of Microsoft's products.
You're claims of "unfair" prices are absurd. What's unfair about charging the same price today that they charged in 1995 for a much better product? You're living proof of why command economies are doomed to failure - government bureaucrats setting prices based on politics rather than what it actually costs to produce a product. For the record, what price do you consider "fair" for a product like XP and what do you base that upon?
Current Events » in reply to Re: How can you claim to understand economics, Buck...
The market is divided into multiple OSs
