> because they could compensate by throwing some costly hardware and I must point out that it is usually from Intel that M$ is in monopoly in consumer and enter

> because they could compensate by throwing some costly hardware and I must point out that it is usually from Intel that M$ is in monopoly in consumer and enterprise market. It’s unclear what you mean by this sentence. Are you saying Microsoft somehow benefits if we buy more Intel? So there’s a developer at Microsoft who wrote in their performance review “yes, I’m proud to say that I worsened the experience for Microsoft users, but it’s ok because that leads to sales for Intel”. Leaving aside that Intel is playing catch up in the processor market now, do you actually believe this? Anyone else reading this comment - this is why it’s impossible for me to take these folks seriously. They concoct these conspiracy theories that are only slightly more logical than flat earth.