By investing in Apple, isn't Microsoft still technically a monopoly?

Question

Please correct my history if I'm mistaken, but from what I understand:

Microsoft was considered a monopoly because of unethical practices it used to weed out Netscape, even though there are still other e/net browsers available.

Then Microsoft was in danger of being considered a monopoly as Apply was in danger of going under (or at least not being a significant competitor), so they invested $100,000,000 in Apple.

So, now that Microsoft is invested in their competition...aren't they technically a monopoly?

Answer 1

well, microsoft isnt a monopoly anyway no matter if it did invest in apple or not, because there are still other computer options people can by, suck as linux.

Answer 2

If I remember correctly, Microsoft didn't invest in Apple but Bill Gates did.

Anyway for a monopoly you need to have control, or at least some dialogue, only investing isn't sufficient. So as long as Microsoft didn't get involved in Apple nothing is wrong.

Answer 3

No, because

1. MicroSoft does not own a controlling interest in Apple Computers.

2. Lenovo makes computers that compete with Apple Computers.

3. MicroSoft has to pay Apple License fees to use the GUI services in Windows, which are licenses from Apple Computers.