I would agree with you if I would consider Microsoft a monopoly! There are many options for me, as a consumer, to choose - Linux, MacOS, etc. and many programs I can use, so I don't think Microsoft is a true monopoly. Think about it this way - if Microsoft was a true monopoly that could control everything, then they could set prices sky-high, right?? No, because if they did that, I and many more, would turn to Linux!
But I guess this subject needs a clear definition of the word "MONOPOLY"

At least Microsoft tries to be a monopoly.
Just look at the browser wars and especially the server market. There's reason to force Microsoft to make their server software open source.
And would you really turn to Linux? An OS where most of the games don't work, a lot of graphic cards and other hardware has compability issues? I guess you won't. And now think about WHY most hardware works on Windows but not on Linux.

Yes, I would turn to Linux, because if everyone started using Linux all of a sudden, then do you really think there would be no developers creating games for Linux? The reason most of the stuff works on Windows, is because it was made for Windows and that is because Windows is the OS most of the consumers use! The developers make software for the platform that would give them more profits!
But you also have to think, were the developers physically forced to create software for Windows? No, everyone has a choice. If you made a wrong one, don't blame other companies for that!

Wrong, there's no choice, there's only a market and nobody can survive with creating games for a platform that isn't widely used.

Also nobody will - all of sudden - change the OS because there's no software yet. You can't just say "friggin' Windows is to expensive. Now I'm using Linux".

Maybe there's software but then it's mostly open source... and here's the problem: it must be compatible to Microsoft's OS but the want you to pay a fee for information about their protocols.

Got that?

Well, someone here needs to learn a bit about business and how consumers choose their products! Every year, more and more consumers start using Linux as opposed to Windows! And every year, more and more software is being developed for the open-source OS! See the pattern? If that doesn't prove that everyone has a choice, then I don't know what will!
Let's think about a situation where Linux becomes more popular than Windows, because at these consumer rates and the fines being forced on Microsoft, it is possible! For what OS do you think the developers would start creating software? For what OS would people start creating games? The one that is more popular or less popular? Catch my drift?

EDIT: Also, I would like to know what OS are you all using? And I mean all of the people who posted here!

I still don't get it. Why must Microsoft remove their Media Player? There are free and commercial media players out there. Nothing in Windows prevents you from installing them. And why do they have to provide their source code for "server products"? The Wikipedia article only focusses on the Samba protocol. In particular MS was sued for making available the source code but not the specs- with source code and a network analyzer why do you need the specs ?

It really seems to me tha the EU overstepped its bounds here.

German article:

http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/web/0,1518,538189,00.html