> This really seems like looking back with rose-colored glasses.

It works both ways. It's hard to look back at the time while ignoring all the paths the road has taken since then.

Microsoft has always been company that is very good at building software compared their competition at the time. Their office productivity software, for example, is what made Windows popular (Windows is useless without apps). It's easy to give more weight to their flaws because, in many ways, their successes just seem obvious now.

> Microsoft has always been company that is very good at building software compared their competition at the time.

I have never, ever heard that. (Edit: Name such software today.)

> Their office productivity software, for example, is what made Windows popular (Windows is useless without apps).

Completely false. Windows was already a monopoly, and the US government successfully sued Microsoft for using their Windows monopoly to leverage sales for Office. They told manufacturers: If you want Windows (which was essential) for the computer, you must pay for an Office license too.

Where do you get this stuff or why are you posting it?