Here is a premise:
This restraint may partly reflect Microsoft's market strategy--after all, Microsoft beat Apple partly because Apple did practice vertical foreclosure, and as a result inhibited the development of complementary software (although the main problem was Apple's persistent belief, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that everyone would be willing to pay a premium price for a niftier machine).

Here is a hypothesis:
Apple bested Microsoft and were correct in believing people would be willing to pay more money for a fancy machine.

Here are the options: Options are:
I. yes.
II. it is not possible to tell.
III. no.
Is it possible to conclude that if the premise is true, then so is the hypothesis?
III.