The thing with puns for captions is they can help lure unsuspecting readers. Or at least they can make you think that they are doing that. I just realized, this does not make the cut either way.
So to clear the pun-ridden air, lets just assume you've gotten the idea that we are indeed going to be talking about Microsoft and its very serious relationship with Antitrust issues in the past, and about how its now trying to repay the favour to all its favourite people in the world.
To summarize what happened in the Microsoft vs USA case, Microsoft was sued for trying to include its web browser into its bundle of products that it shipped with its operating system - thereby locking out competition in the web browser market using its foothold in the OS market.
My question - and I'm not sure if someone's already asked it - is this,
If there were no bundled web browser along with your OS, how would you download your open source fix? Wait for the CD in the mail? Somehow I don't see that happening. Again. I'm not sure that Microsoft's plaintiff did not argue this point. He did have a law degree.
I just keep wondering, if Microsoft had not turned so bitter because of this case, would Steve Ballmer and Eric Schmidt be golfing buddies? And would this man still have made 500 million friends?
I am neither Pro nor Anti-Microsoft. In fact I love the current standoff. I think its healthy. Quite similar to the Mexican Standoff, except it feels more like an Indian Standoff.
Its like - Microsoft, Facebook and Google are water starved women in some small sowcarpet street in Madras. Metaphorically speaking that is.
I guess that would makes us the tanker lorry that spills more than it holds onto the narrow rickety road.
PS: I'm considering the idea of getting sued for flouting some immigration law.
I kinda like how pompous such a suit would sound like - Manigandan vs USA.