Obviously folks could argue the MS saga until they're 6ft under. Me, I'm on the side that says we had a chance to really force changes in MS's behaviour to everyone's benefit and we blew it. I think consumers got the shaft on this one.
$5K is a drop in the bucket for MS and wouldn't deter future wrongdoings...but, should we break up any and all companies who do things wrong?
Breaking them up is certainly extreme, and I don't necessarily agree with it, but it was only one of many options. Something had to be done, and it had to be substantial.
On one hand are valid arguments for minimizing government's intervention into the market, but on the other hand our market system is not a 'perfect' market to begin with - there are countless factors that skew and pervert it's theoretical operation. Additionally, what's good for the consumer/general public is often in conflict with what's good for the company and someone has to step in and act on behalf of the public.
If a company violates the law, then yes, actions should be taken to remedy the situation. Again, not necessarily to punish, but to prevent further offense.