Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> SOFTWARE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
>>
>> 68. Microsoft has used its monopoly in the operating system market to dictate
>> the terms and conditions trader which OEMs are engaged, on Microsoft?s behalf
>> and as Microsoft?s agent, to communicate Microsoft?s offers of end-user
>> licenses to purchasers of PCs. OEMs have no choice but to accede to
>> Microsoft?s demands. Because of Microsoft?s monopoly, both the OEMs and
>> Microsoft believe that there does not exist a single, commercially viable
>> alternative to the pre-installation of Microsoft operating systems on PCs
>> manufactured and sold by OEMs. Conclusions of Law, 87 F. Supp. 2d a 37.
>> Because OEMs have no other viable choice, Microsoft effectively forced OEMs to
>> preinstall Microsoft operating systems on their PCs and to jointly act with
>> Microsoft to offer end-user licenses for acceptance or rejection by customers
>> under terms strictly and exclusively dictated by Microsoft. As an example of
>> Microsoft's domination and control of the OEM distribution channel, Microsoft
>> strictly limits the freedom of OEMs to add to, delete from, or modify the
>> operating system, its start-up sequence, or the content and appearance of the
>> Windows desktop.
Of course, only monoply power in the market allows such abuse.
> "Linux is free, and yet it's still at 1% after 17 years," flatty snivelled.
Sure, because there's "something wrong" with Linux. Nothing at all to
do with Micro$oft dirty tricks. According to shitheaded trolls,
anyway...
--
"What monopoly?" - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark
|
|
