[WalterBright]

Every device I buy comes bundled with a free browser, along with a long laundry list of other bundled utilities. The idea that a browser is somehow special doesn't stand up, and special if it comes with Windows even less so. Linux also comes with tons of free software that is hard to compete with.

I know for a fact that Netscape was an inferior product to IE. I downloaded IE and uninstalled Netscape. I made an extra effort to not use Netscape anymore, because it was nearly unusable due to crashing. Maybe if Netscape had a better product, I'd be sympathetic.

It's not a conspiracy if an inferior product fails in the marketplace. Happens all the time.

[gnaritas]

The quality of Netscape's product is not relevant. It is only relevant that Microsoft used anti-competitive practices to try and put them out of business. As you can't seem to tell the difference, there is little point in conversing.

[WalterBright]

Of course it is relevant. It is perfectly adequate to explain the demise of Netscape. Microsoft didn't make Netscape crash, Netscape did.

Ironically, I use Chrome now because IE crashes constantly when accessing github.com.

I presume you mean the "anti-competitive practice" of including it with Windows. Windows is full of utilities that come with it, ditto with every other operating system before or since. Why is a browser special? Why are other companies entitled to not have competition from Microsoft? What do you make of Linux coming bundled with huge swaths of quality free software?

> As you can't seem to tell the difference

You're quite right :-)