Anthex- I would first like to say that I have enjoyed discussing this issue with you and everyone here. I do not with to be labled a "whiny linux lover/ windows hater" or anything else of that matter. I wish to represent my image as someone who is only trying to have a professional discussion on an issue. Thank you. Nice, I love it how you provided some facts from articles to back up your opinion. I am a bit confused, however, by this statement. "The only place where Microsoft has a 97% market share is in desktop systems." That means desktop systems preinstalled with the Microsoft OS correct? Also, I realize that Microsoft has other producs and while I am mainly talking about the OS overall, my argument revolves around the future growth of technology that microsoft produces. If it were up to me, and I don't know the details of the situation, I would split Microsoft up into different companies that were blind to eachother as far as source code went. Their competition would increase the rate of growth and technology, rather than one company doing things at it's convenience so they make more money. (Like the phone company using old technology for 10 years.) "What gives the government the right to take your company that you have worked very hard with, to make money, to be successful... what gives them the right to take it.. and say "You cant sell your product anymore because people are idiots and mostly buy your product"" We obviously have differing opinions. I believe that Microsoft has a monopoly, by definition, on it's operating system. You don't. I also believe that, becuase of the anti-trust laws, government should take action against microsoft and split them up. (As far as OS production goes.) A result of this would be better products at cheaper prices. (Therefore better for the consumer.) The reason is not because "You cant sell your product anymore because people are idiots and mostly buy your product."