On 5/6/05, DJA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But being BIG in the marketplace is part of the definition of a > monopoly. Pretty tough to be unsuccessful and be a monopoly, and vice > versa without being either the government or government subsidized. > > My point was that it is unfair to imply that because Linux exists as a > competitor that that is evidence that Microsoft is not really a > monopolist after all. > > To me, neither Linux nor Google are relevant examples of successful > competitors against Microsoft's anti-competitive and monopolistic > business practices anyway.
What would be a relevant example? -todd -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
