My point was that FSF achieved its maximal influence during the reign of Microsoft. And I argue that is not a coincidence.
Microsoft is still in control. What's their market share for Windows machines? 90+%?
Most windows machines these days are dumb clients to the web, so that fact that Microsoft provides the software for this doesn't seem like a huge win.
It was this openness that earned Microsoft its market monopoly on the OS and consequent positive network externalities - benefits that the company has leveraged to maintain its dominance of the desktop for two decades.
So what I'm proposing is this: perhaps the FSF did well during the reign of Microsoft not as a foil to the big, evil monopolistic corporation, but rather because the FSF is the logical conclusion of the very strategy Microsoft itself has used to establish and maintain its market share.