I don't think most people who bash Microsoft really know, cognitively, why they do it. But there is a social dynamic in effect that causes people to resent, and therefore attack, what they cannot quite understand.
Most people imagine that the United States is a democracy. Others will correct them and say, no, it is a republic. Both of these are really a statement of expectation, not actual fact.
The US is in truth a plutocracy. Firstly, the freedom of the press is only truly open to those who can afford to publish. The emergence of mass media in the 20th century further centralized the primary means of communication in a small number of corporate hands. That person or corporation with the most power, in economic terms, can "speak" with the greatest volume.
The Internet has lowered the barrier to communication, and is the leading edge of the revolution (see, it's not being televised, is it?) in terms of giving a greater and increasing voice to those with the greatest persuasiveness, rather than those with the most financial means to promote their message. What will hopefully emerge from this process is a totally new form of government, a meritocracy. In my opinion, music will be the greatest power. Some might suggest pornography will rule. Much of what goes for popular music today (given current media) is some combination of the two.
In the meantime, and returning to the subject of this journal entry, the company with the greatest financial clout in the world right now is Microsoft. Moreover, the company is controlled in large part by a single man, William Gates III. What he says Microsoft will publish, they will publish. When he wants to back a candidate for office, he can ensure that candidate will have the full power of the press behind him.
I am not trying to say that Gates is a bad man, only that he is a man who controls the largest share of the liquid assets which confer power. There are many other wealthy individuals and families, some of whom probably resent Gates. His power is counterbalanced by the old money still very capable of exercising their power.
If my thesis is right, and this is a plutocratic system, then Gates is nominally the king, with no hereditary right of succession as such, unless he can prolong his wealth into the next generation.
Thus the GNU project, and associated free software and open source projects, originally aimed at AT&T, has become a loaded gun pointed at the king himself.
Here's the important thing to note about the SCO case: if we win, and I cannot stress enough how confident I am that we will, we demonstrate that we are already stronger than the king's first soldier.