As a Microsoft MVP, I’m continually asked (teased?) about Microsoft’s software "monopoly" — I explain that while I believe they’ve leveraged their large user base to “bully” some vendors . . . Microsoft has ALWAYS been about creating an infrastructure that is open for 3rd party hardware manufacturers, software developers, industry standards and all types of small vendors. Microsoft is (usually) anything but a monopoly.I personally feel that Apple is a good example of a monopoly. Apple controls their hardware, software and iTunes store. Apple does not allow other hardware manufacturers to create compatible computers. You can’t run their operaing system on other hardware (even though it will!). There are no MP3 players that directly works with iTunes, nor are you "allowed" to write native applications for their iPhone.Today and tomorrow’s monopolistic worry is Google. Most people naively see Google as simply a "search engine" company, not realizing Google’s ownership (and tracking) via the many other websites they visit.Thankfully, I’m very pleased to read that President Obama’s pick for U.S. Antitrust Chief agrees. (^_^)–> Read BLOOMBERG: Antitrust Pick Varney Saw Google as Next Microsoft
(Thanks Gizmodo)
The Road to Know Where 