Even with a big ballot of 25 choices this year, the top ten still accumulated two-thirds of reader votes: Microsoft with 21% of the 2,000-plus votes cast, Comcast 10%, Dell 9%, Apple 8%, Symantec 7%, Sony 6%, HP 5%, AT&T 4%, Verizon 4%, and AOL 3%. Many readers talked about what a struggle it was to pick the one worst company out of so many worthy candidates. "Tough decision," wrote one. "Comcast is the only ISP available in my neighborhood, or I would have switched to any other provider because two years of nagging intermittent connectivity problems. Apple selling a phone for $600 was ludicrous -- you can get a laptop for $600, but a freakin' PHONE? Fortunately for those two, Microsoft is even worse. How can a company make an OS with only 40 percent the speed of its predecessor and call it an upgrade? With at least three times as many bugs? And force everyone to pay $200 or more for it just to have some hope of tech support in the future? If an individual did that, it would be called extortion."

Frankly, I was surprised Microsoft won so handily, particularly after last year when Symantec edged them out for the top spot. Yes, Vista was the source of innumerable gripes in 2007, but since so many have chosen not to go with the new Windows, I thought anti-Redmond passions would be cooling simply because fewer would care. And so this result makes me wonder - is the fact that over 20 percent of readers would still vote them worst vendor a bad thing for Microsoft, or maybe actually a good sign? I'm not sure.

Symantec falling all the way from first in 2006 to fifth in 2007, and from 22% of total votes to 7%, was definitely a shocker. Similarly, Verizon went all the way from third place and 11% of the vote to ninth with just 4%. Oddly enough, though, both Symantec and Verizon continued to prompt a lot of vitriol in the reader commentary accompanying the poll. My best explanation for this seeming contradiction is that Symantec and Verizon in particular benefited from having the much larger field of 25 candidates -- readers who picked them a year ago on general dislike found an even someone even more deserving amongst the extra choices this time.

Apple was the one company that was on last year's list to significantly increase its poll numbers this time, going from eighth place and 4% to fourth and 8%. In fact, last year a few readers expressed outrage that I would include Apple among the ten candidates, but nobody's questioning that they belong now. I think it shows that the iPhone bricking shenanigans have tarnished Apple's image in a way that may prove to be indelible.

But perhaps the biggest surprise was how Comcast came out of nowhere to finish a strong second. But then again, maybe it's not such a surprise when you consider the games Comcast plays with its customers like suspending broadband Internet accounts for violating unstated bandwidth limits, or the way they nickel and dime cable customers channel by channel. Perhaps what one reader said is the reason for the company's emergence as a top worst vendor candidate: "Seriously, those who didn't vote for Comcast, obviously don't have Comcast."

In fact, let me risk a small prediction. I bet next year Comcast beats Microsoft handily. And, barring events on the ground that would radically shift the paradigm, I also expect we'll see the Verizons and AT&Ts rise above the Symantecs and Dells in terms of volume of gripes, and their intensity. As the network companies look to leverage their local quasi-monopolies in one sector into "triple-play" and "quad-play" dominance, customers are going to find themselves forced to pick up the tab.

Who do you predict will be the Worst Vendor of 2008? Post your thoughts below, or write Ed Foster at Foster@gripe2ed.com.