I think what is lost in this is what constitutes the anti-competitive abuse. Is it abuse to bundle the software? No. Is it abuse to make the software better? No. Outspending your competition in marketing is not abuse, and neither is bundling IE with Windows.

The abuse comes when they use their market share to force users hands. (consumers, businesses, etc...) Abuse is ignoring user preferences and forcing the use of a Microsoft product. Abuse is forcing manufacturers into agreements to stifle the manufacturers ability to offer alternatives. All of which Microsoft has done for nearly a decade, Europe just has the balls to call them out.

All OS's bundle products, Windows, Ubuntu, OSX, etc. The difference however is that they don't go out of their way to inconvenience you for choosing alternatives. If you want to show the market you don't approve of their business policies, buy a Mac, or an Ubuntu Dell. Either is more than fine for (I'm guessing) 90% of consumers. Most consumers only browse and send email. And there are still commercial products that match Office feature for feature. I personally have no Microsoft products in my house, clearing my conscience. In a perfect world, that shouldn't matter.