> They could have done the same thing. Nope, the MS-DOS and Windows market was too big by then to introduce a new incompatible system. Ask OS/2 how it worked o

> They could have done the same thing. Nope, the MS-DOS and Windows market was too big by then to introduce a new incompatible system. Ask OS/2 how it worked out. > There was no lock in with Macs Sure there was. Firstly, many schools across the country had been convinced to by Macs through the educational discounts Apple gave, and school bureaucracies like all government bureaucracies move very slowly, so aren't going to switch, but simply maintain and grow the bureaucracy. Secondly, if you had actually invested in a bunch of Mac software and a LaserWriter, the sunk cost fallacy would lead many people to stay in. And then there's Cognitive Dissonance. > Have you ever thought that it wasn’t just about the hardware? Mac software and hardware was inferior until the Intel switch-over. Sure, MacOS was more consistent, but the software available for the platform was worse. And in some categories, practically non-existent compared to Windows. Almost every single response I see from you in threads is like a paleo-libertarian response that "things are the way they are because they are what the market intended" without almost no insight into how consumers can be manipulated by corporations.