This is technically true (the best kind of true), but fails to mention that there was both a huge gap between Office on the Mac between 4.2 and 98 (coincidental

This is technically true (the best kind of true), but fails to mention that there was both a huge gap between Office on the Mac between 4.2 and 98 (coincidentally the version that came out in 1998 right around the antitrust case), and more importantly, ignores the fact that Microsoft literally is on record threatening to use Office to kill Mac, and negotiations around Office were literally presented as evidence during the antritust case against Microsoft: https://www.macworld.com/article/184614/macoffice.html https://www.macworld.com/article/184614/macoffice.html > Later, the U.S. Department of Justice included the bundling of Internet Explorer among the charges it brought against Microsoft in its antitrust case. "Microsoft, by threatening to cease development of its Office for Macintosh productivity suite, coerced Apple into making Internet Explorer the default browser on all Macintosh operating systems and to disadvantage competing browsers," the federal agency charged in 1998. It's not really debatable whether an unchecked Microsoft monopoly would have affected Office on the Mac or whether it would have affected the trajectory of Apple's ecosystem as a whole -- it was straight-up part of the antitrust case against Microsoft. Delaying and degrading Office releases on Mac was the active policy of Microsoft by the late 1990s, both because it gave Microsoft power over Apple during business negotiations and because it allowed Microsoft to simultaneously hold off competing office-suite products while pulling more users away from Mac towards Windows, which had more up-to-date and less buggy versions of Office and IE. --- And of course, notably, this is an example of antitrust being relevant to a company choosing not to provide a service. It's not merely that Microsoft went out of its way to block Apple's access, Microsoft was threatening to withhold development on Apple-compatible products. So let's not pretend that asking a company to go out of its way to do something can't be part of antitrust or that companies have an unimpeachable moral right to refuse to expend developer resources or adapt their business models when their business models are anticompetitive. Apple certainly wasn't arguing that it was "theft" in 1998 when the government was pointing out that Microsoft withholding active support could be an anticompetitive action.