Yep. It is clearly another slap on Microsoft's collective wrist, and since the donation is largely software, it doesn't really cost them anywhere near $1B. COG (cost of goods) on software, including Microsoft's own, is a fraction of the retail cost (think <10%), so they can appear to give away tons of software when in reality it is the cheapest PR stunt they've pulled all year.
This will, of course, make it very difficult for competitors to get/remain in the education market(s), which is just so like Microsoft to do.
Of course, the bright spot in all of this is that they're not really fooling everyone. From the article:
Nancy Hudnall, an accountant from Rolla, Mo., faulted the terms of the proposed deal.
"Settlement of this case as proposed is a slap in the face of all consumers, as well as free trade," she said. "By allowing Microsoft to remedy their anti-competitive actions by infiltrating our schools, the consumer and Microsoft are in a 'lose-win' situation."
Hudnall emphasized that she is a user of Microsoft products and has no grudges against the company. "However, I do feel that our legal system is not acting in the public's best interest," she said. "The need of schools should be addressed in another manner, not as a means to alleviate our judicial system's inability to deal with Microsoft's unethical business dealings."