a better comparison would be a network protocol (smb/cifs/windows network vs samba) or file format (ms office vs odf).

the web browser issue was one of using a virtual monopoly in one area to potentially create one in another via bundling (buy one, get the other free).

thing is that at the time the browser was not the real issue, it was server tech. netscape had their server, microsoft had iis.

both sides had in theory dirty hands, but netscape at least avoided giving one part away to sell the other (browser with custom support for value adding additions at the server end).

microsoft had already virtually taken down one competitor via bundling, novell.

novell did the stupid thing of concentrating on the server alone, while allowing microsoft to handle the client side via windows. microsoft then put client side support for their own server (exchange) into windows, and that way made the setup a near drop in replacement for novell's product. and microsoft marketing could make a sell on one stop support, making the customers sys admin life easier.

now the real weight of microsoft rests on two things, ms office and exchange. and thats why they fight hard against openoffice and google's services.

basically, ms office and exchange in combo is like a RAD environment for cooperative solutions.