Re:Not that suprising (Score 1)

Be came to the market late and hit the high-barriers to entry that the consumer OS market provides. This isn't MS's fault

Read Judge Jackson's Finding of Fact. He seems to think so, and it's his opinion that matters.

Microsoft may have taken advantage of many market barriers and created a couple (exclusive licensing) - but they did not have much to do cuonsumers becoming resistant to change - it's a human condition (look at the reactionaries around you). Linux and Open Source are growing because they have prostletysed (sp?) continually and convinced the business community that they are an excellent alternative. There still has not been a large impact in the consumer impact

I don't think the lack of consumer Unix based systems had anything to do with MS monopoly in 90-94

There was no lack of consumer Unix. Minix cost less than a copy of Windows 3.0, and one could get Xenix, from Microsoft, for only slightly more. Hell, buying my first 386 Olivetti cost LESS with Xenix than with their 'standard' Windows developer package.

That may be true - but they certainly weren't marketed at the consumer now were they. This survey is almost certainly been answered in the majrotiy by a consumers - not geeks. Consumers wanted "user friendliness". No one marketed Xenix or Minix as a consumer OS.