Now that you don't name Anderson in the headline, you need his first name in the lead sentence. (Hmm, just checked the original. Was his name in the headline at one time?)

Second paragraph, two hyphenated phrases? I would rewrite it:

IBM, Sun, Oracle, Hewlett Packard, Linux, AOL/Times Warner - each a company to be reckoned with - all working in the same direction, take on the characteristics of a lava flow. And they have friends, lots of friends (OK, maybe not AOL, but the rest of them do).

Starting with the preposition is technically a gramar violation, but I think it's acceptable for stylistic impact.

General gripe: There has to be a better way of starting a sentence with '.NET' than anyone has found yet. (This isn't just directed at your article, though it has an example of it.) Starting a product name with a period is just wrong.

Under "How will .NET Work":

... so they built a new language. C#

I think that period is supposed to be a colon.


Under "Microsoft Instant Messaging," last sentence: "getting an injunctions" should obviously be "getting an injunction."


Under "Collaborating and Cooperating": "Times/Warner" should be "Time/Warner".

And the last paragraph of that section, two hyphenated phrases again. I'd make the first hyphen a comma and drop the comma before "Microsoft Rules." It's following an essential clause.


Under "Can They Do It?": "No other program will work now, Users trying ..." Comma for period.

"Every time they are hauled into court they will be presumed guilty (and probably are)." I agree with the editorializing, but that seems a little strong, considering there will likely soon be a whole sub-class of attorneys who specialize in filing Microsoft anti-trust suits. Wait, that sub-class already exists: ambulance chasers.

"We don't have to care, were Microsoft!" Need an apostrophe in the possessive.


That's all from this spelling/grammar/editorial Nazi. BTW I like this article as much as I always like your stuff. But you did pretty much beg for us to break out the red pens. ;)