You're leaving out one important point. At the time Windows 3.x came out Microsoft was telling developers of products that competed with theirs that OS/2 (which was a joint MS / IBM product at the time) was the os of the future. Consequently, WordPerfect put most of their development effort behind an OS/2 port. WordPerfect may have miscalculated, but they made their decision based, in part, on information from MS.
Somehow, I think it's more likely that NPD Group's research or their method of measuring downloads is flawed.
This is exactly the idea. They don't want the books to be cheaper, they just want a larger percentage of the (ridiculous) retail price to go directly to them. More power to them - but I still won't buy the dang things. Paying $9.99 for an ebook when I can get a (new) printed copy for $7.99 - which I can then loan to my friends or sell to a used book store - is just silly.
I think a better answer is to simply not allow utility patents to cover processes (or not allow utility patents at all).
(Self professed Mac fan) Well, maybe they did. The suit is partially over advertising claims. http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/graphics.html
"Promote your ideas on the MacBook Pro's dazzling display. An aggressive ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 graphics processor under the hood coupled with up to 256MB of GDDR3 SDRAM powers the mobile visual studio you've been waiting for. Retouch color, edit on location, video conference with colleagues: Do it all, anywhere. MacBook Pro makes your ideas more enlightening, with a sharp, high-resolution screen. See blacker blacks, whiter whites, and many more colors in between on a brilliant 15.4-inch, 1440-by-900-pixel or 17-inch, 1680-by-1050-pixel digital display. Enjoy a nuanced view simply unavailable on other portables."(Emphasis mine) This could well be considered false advertising. JD