Maybe not — but what about the user who has paid money to purchase the physical hardware?

Does that person, the owner of the computer on which said software runs, get a say about whether or not they wish to purchase and install third-party software that alters the way Windows works? Or is that a matter only for Microsoft to decide by themselves?

The new technology being promoted by Microsoft make it impossible to install hardware drivers, system softare and libraries, and even 3rd party software, without being “approved” by Microsoft.

In effect, Microsoft is defining Linux, Solaris, SCO Unix, FreeBSD, and VMWare to be a “Virus” and will have the ability to “lock out” all of these “viruses”. In effect, Microsoft will now have more control that it has ever had before, and more monopoly control than it had prior to the start of the antitrust trial in 1998.

Companies are starting to preinstall Desktop Linux.

http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/23168/

You rightly point out that they are well known name brands, which means that if their software is as good as they would clearly like to think it is, and IF Microsoft’s built in software is NOT as good, and not up to task, then they have little to worry about.

If well known name brands have a right to defend their brand and market share then Microsoft have an equal right to improve their own brand (Although I use the term ‘improve’ loosely at this juncture!). There is nothing that says Microsoft MUST allow third party software agents to make their money by installing onto Windows.

If Microsoft create an updated version of Windows, and people buy into it then all power to them. If third parties then have to adjust the way they do their business, business which relies on their abilities to install and function on Microsoft Windows, then they had better stop whining about changes and get with the program! No one is stopping them from aiming their software at Linux users!

All of the companies whining about Vista have made their money by installing onto a Microsoft operating system. That DOES NOT give them the right to dictate how that OS will develop and what it can and cannot do. They are the parasites that exist because of Windows. Not the other way around.

I understand your point that they have the right to defend themselves if Microsoft looks like diminishing their market shares, but they got those shares because of Microsoft in the first place, so rather than whining about their host, they should do what is needed to embrace the changes that it has made.

Just as a final point - I use Ubuntu and I own a laptop with XP on it for work purposes only.