Why Microsoft Should Fear Intel Macs" 564

Sandman

You're playing word games, but I'll just add this. We're not talking about "merely refusing to sell-license your product". We're talking about refusing to sell-license a product *that had been previously available for sale-license, and on which other products depended* because you don't feel like actually competing with them anymore.

But you're hung up on whether that would be "monopoly" abuse. Fine, but if Microsoft had done the above Microsoft-Dell scenario, they would've been ripped to ribbons by the tech media, tech fanboys, governments, buisness media, etc. You can't honestly believe that everyone would've just been OK with it. It would have been considered "bad", worse than anything that Microsoft has ever done or even been accused of. And Apple did that thing.

I'll amend my earlier statement just for you: Apple's act was a worse abuse of power than anything that Microsoft ever did. See, I removed the "monopoly" adjective. (But I only ammend my statement to saitisfy your reasoning; not for myself or anyone else, because I think "monopoly" is the correct word to use in this case).