Coercive Monopolism vs Wimpyness

[Blanc <blancw@cnw.com>]

Attila T. Hut quoted Tom Steinert-Threlkeld:

"So, it can't coerce computer makers to license the IE
browser as a condition of licensing the Windows operating
system, forcing them to install both onto the machines they
sell to the public."
...................................................

How do computer makers get "coerced"?  How, specifically are they "forced"
into doing something they don't want to do?   Are they incapable of just
saying "no"?  Is there a gun put to their head?  Does someone threaten them
with DoJ action if they don't participate in the game of monopoly?   Why do
they continue to lie down and roll over when MS comes around - don't they
know they're contributing to the demise of Netscape and the other
better-than-thou companies, which are *much* more deserving of success than
Gates is, since they're kinder & gentler?   Whose side are these people on,
anyway; how can they renege on the right to choose and instead just
_give_it_up_ to Microsoft?

And, since Windows OS is so pitifully lousy, why do people continue to buy
it, even without the computer attached;  why do they continue to upgrade,
even if it's so slow and bloated?   Don't they realize Unix is better?
Don't they realize they're just making Billg richer?

What's the matter with all these people, anyway (Attila)?
    ..
Blanc