If you really wanted to not go there, you shouldn't have characterized my argument in a false way. And when your mistake was pointed out, you should have acknow

If you really wanted to not go there, you shouldn't have characterized my argument in a false way. And when your mistake was pointed out, you should have acknowledged the point. Go ahead. Avoid the tedium of responding. It will avoid me the unpleasantness of further dishonest evasion on your part. Meanwhile the facts remain these. From 1990 through 2011, Microsoft was continually being sued by or under consent decree in the USA for antitrust violations. From 1993 through 2013, the same was true in the EU. This is in addition to a long list of lawsuits from companies that their behavior harmed. All evidence from external behavior and internal emails in court says that their attitude did not change until 2008. This is not a counterfactual argument. And it provides good reason to believe that the 1998 publicity of having Bill Gates in court did not deter Microsoft from further antitrust actions.