As a young person studying computer science, I watched Microsoft use crooked business practices to foist its empirically inferior software on the masses. In many cases, they wrote their OS to cause competing software to crash or perform poorly. I did work on Windows 95, 97, and 2000, so I know first hand how bad they were. And yet MS became dominant. Why? Largely because they wouldn't allow any computer makers to sell Windows and any competing software at the same time. In the end, you were either an MS shop or an Apple retailer. The end result was that the computing industry was held back approximately a decade in terms of OS technology. As direct evidence for this, I present the fact that NeXT existed in 1987, almost a decade before Windows 95. NeXT was already a full and modern OS, and indeed forms the basis for Mac OSX. Think about that: The important parts of OSX, a fairly decent modern OS existed nearly a decade before the turd that is Windows 95.
I am not a fanboy. I use Linux and OSX, and I freely admit that neither are perfect. OSX is retreating back to being an iOS black box, while Linux is sometimes irritating. But I will never move back to Microsoft. I saw what they did. I know that they have made the quality of the technology we all use poorer through their monopolistic practices. The parent article only confirms for me that Microsoft has not changed.