__/ [ 7 ] on Friday 28 July 2006 19:39 \__
> Mark Kent wrote:
>
>> begin oe_protect.scr
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> Microsoft Outlines Three-Pronged Linux Attack Plan
>>>
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>| How does Microsoft plan to outgrow Linux in the coming years? There are
>>>| three arenas, or workloads, where Microsoft is focusing especially
>>>| strongly: security/edge computing; Web/hosting; and
>>>| high-performance computing.
>>> `----
>>>
>>> http://www.microsoft-watch.com
> article2/0,1995,1995263,00.asp?kc=MWRSS02129TX1K0000535
>>>
>>> What about the fourth missing area? FUD, disinformation, lies. And the
>>> fifth? Briberies/bounties for migration. And the sixth? Blockage through
>>> OEM deals.
>>
>> Seventh - monopoly abuse by pushing competing products to Microsoft PCs
>> using WGA capability.
>>
>> Eighth - abusing monoply by preventing interworking with other products
>
> and not having the documentation for their own networking protocols and
> getting convicted and fined as a monopoly for it.
>
> Nineth - using a viral installer to delete multi-boot information of other
> operating systems from PCs unlike Linux distributions like SuSE and Ubuntu
> in order to grab monopoly market share and then bribing police, judges and
> other law enforcement officials to avoid prosecution for manufacturing,
> warehousing and distribution of viri products.
Ten - when convicted, software vouchers (rather than monetary compenstation)
are granted. Our Billy says it's also referred to as 'Trucking' (intersting
story behind it; therefore appended), which is supposedly illegal in the UK.
Best wishes,
Roy
=========================================================================
Begin appendix
__/ [ B Gruff ] on Thursday 27 July 2006 22:52 \__
> On Thursday 27 July 2006 19:42 Mark Kent wrote:
>
>> begin oe_protect.scr
>> B Gruff <bbgruff@xxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> On Thursday 27 July 2006 16:48 Mark Kent wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is just corruption. I don't know how anyone could have any
>>>> confidence in a judicial system which would permit this - it's totally
>>>> incredible. Basically, Microsoft won.
>>>
>>> It used to be called trucking.
>>> It was made illegal in the UK.
>>>
>>
>> Good! Do you know what the background to this was?
>
> Trucking ? The truck laws?
>
> AFAIR, mill-owners in particular (to mid 19th century?) used to pay workers
> part cash, part vouchers. The vouchers could be exchanged for goods in the
> company shop. I dare say that some companies were good ones, bought good
> stuff in bulk, sold (exchanged it for vouchers) at reasonable rates.
> That wasn't typical! Typical was poor goods, high price, and bigger
> profits for the mill owners.
> After riots or near riots, it became illegal to pay for goods or services
> in anything *other* than "coin of the realm" - *unless* whoever you were
> paying consented to be paid otherwise, e.g. by cheque.
> A few decades ago, this was a problem as companies more and more wanted to
> pay wages by cheque or transfer, to save handling cash, wage-snatches, etc.
> However IFAIR they could only do it if each individual employee agreed.
> Each person could demand cash - coin of the realm.
> Many ordinary folks didn't have a current account (America = checking
> account?) and many companies went so far as to pay bank charges (this was
> prior to "free personal banking if you stay in credit") for employees to
> win them over.
>
> Hence, I suspect, the expression "Have no truck with them....."
> - conduct any business with them in a very formal manner, because you can't
> trust them. Later came to mean "Don't have any dealings with him/them"?
|
|
