"Our data show that people usually prefer a built-in browser on their start menu by default, not browsers they need to download/install/configure manually"
-Microsoft 20 years ago
-Microsoft 20 years ago
Java applets distributed via the web (executed by Netscape Navigator) had the potential to displace Win32 as a preferred API, thus making Linux and other OS's able to compete with Windows in terms of application offering.
Some OEMs wanted to sell Windows computers with Netscape Navigator preinstalled, because it was way better. Microsoft told them they wouldn't sell them any Windows license at all if they did it, forcing their hand.
Microsoft further preinstalled their own incompatible version of Java, to try and make Java apps non cross-platform. They did the same with Internet Explorer's own incompatible version of web standards, when web apps started to gain popularity.
Windows' monopoly was maintained in part by Microsoft purposefully spending resources in actions that only harmed Windows users (and consumers in general).
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xECUrlnXCqk
The comment you are replying to is showing by way of parallel to Microsoft that this polemic from Google is an absurd defense: your entire comment is something I would imagine the person you are replying to agrees with, which is precisely why they made the comment they did, as it demonstrates in a visceral way how absurd it is to be trying to give Google a free pass just because their product is useful.
You seem to be going around this thread making the same mistake in multiple contexts, such as when you replied to me in this other linked thread, which makes me wonder if you are paying much attention before commenting :/.
Let that person reply then? I'm refuting the parallel between the two cases, even if you don't see it.
Microsoft prevented other companies from selling computers with Netscape Navigator preinstalled.