__/ [ Gordon Hudson ] on Sunday 21 May 2006 10:21 \__
> "Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1894617.98rWO0Nvuu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> __/ [ Administrator GoDaddy Sucks . Com ] on Sunday 21 May 2006 03:35 \__
>>
>>> "Viper" <venomx@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:nO-dndZ3Cpl-XPLZRVn-tA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Administrator GoDaddy Sucks . Com wrote:
>>>>> Wanna know how godaddy treats its employees???
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.
>>>>
>>>> Seeing as you are a spammer, I am glad they fired your ass.
>>>>
>>> I hardly consider posting to 7 or 8 groups as spam... even godaddy
>>> wouldn't consider that spam.
>>
>> Hell no... not even an E-mail sent to all their customers, with a link to
>> a blog...
>>
>> http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2005/03/31/uninvited-mail/
>>
>>> Then again, I dont get into flame wars with idiots!
>>
>> Want a flame war? There you go...
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | Perens: ...GoDaddy was
>> | using Apache (I assume on Linux) because it was a great technical
>> | solution. They didn't switch to IIS on Windows Server 2003 for any
>> | technical reason. The switch was accompanied by a press release by
>> | GoDaddy, containing Microsoft promotional language. Now, I've changed
>> | many servers from one thing to another, but I've never made a press
>> | release about it. GoDaddy wouldn't be doing that unless Microsoft had
>> | offered them something valuable in return. There has been talk in the
>> | domain business that Microsoft has been offering the large domain
>> | registries a wad of cash to switch their parked sites. There is no
>> | other reason to do this than to influence the Netcraft figures.
>> `----
>
> Microsft pays hosts to move to Windows.
> Usually its very cheap or free licensing for a period plus paying part or
> all of their advertising budget, allowing them to make virtually 100%
> profit for several years.
> I have even heard of them paying the hardware bill for one host.
Thanks for that intersting bit of information. I have copied it on to another
newsgroup for further discussion. There is something very fishy about such
vandalism to Open Source adoption. It can be perceived as a type of bribery,
or dirty paractice at the least because it is accompanied by advertisement
and false vanity (and FUD).
More latterly:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39270042,00.htm
Microsoft: Open source 'not reliable or dependable'
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
10:50am up 23 days 17:29, 12 users, load average: 0.36, 0.45, 0.57
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
|
|
