Does Microsoft subscribe to true & fair capitalism?

The answer to that question, as it stands today, is a big NO!. Lets see how Merriam Webster defines 'capitalism' as:

Main Entry: cap·i·tal·ism
Pronunciation: 'ka-p&-t^&l-"iz-&m, 'kap-t^&l-, British also k&-'pi-t^&l-
Function: noun
: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.

The less said about Microsoft's monopolistic pratices the better. I think most of us who have spent a decent amount of time in the tech sector or even otherwise know how M$ ties their customers down to Windows and associated Microsoft products like Office, Outlook, Exchange and otherwise. Until a few years back, all of their products were proprietary and to say that they were closed and uninteropable was an understatement. Its only recently, after receiving endless flak from competitors and the government alike, that Mr. Gates has decided to let go of his highly inequitable ways, to a certain extent ... M$ seems to be on the right track now, but I would not go so far as saying they have betrothed a true capitalistic attitude (as defined by Websters) ... that is yet be proven beyond reasonable doubt, as one would say in legal jargon.

Bill Gates has built a great empire in Microsoft and they do have some kick-ass products (as an aside, I personally truly admire & highly commend all the philanthropic work that is being done via the Gates foundation), but I am sure Gates would want to be remembered as not the richest man in the world, but as the richest man who built an empire and succeeded by subscribing to true & fair capitalism. Steps are being taken by M$ in the right direction and I hope they keep at it ... if that means looking up and taking stock of defines in www.m-w.com every so often, then so be it!