Rex Ballard wrote:
> Doug Mentohl wrote:
> > "The Commission has not given a "green light" to Microsoft to deliver
> > Vista because, as the Commission has consistently stated, Microsoft must
> > shoulder its own responsibilities to ensure that Vista is fully compliant
> > with EC Treaty competition rules"
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/yyzsqm
> > http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/06/377&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
>
> Looks like Microsoft's worst nightmere has come true. They are finally
> subject to the laws and power of a regulatory agency.
>
Wonderful!
> If the EU blocks Vista completely, it could reduce demand in the USA.
> It could also prompt new regulatory actions in the USA. After all, if
> the EU can bring Microsoft to heel, what's wrong with our politicians
> that they can't bring Microsoft into compliance with state, federal,
> and international laws? Politicians might be suspected of being bribed
> by Microsoft.
>
What's wrong with out politicians? Internal dry rot - the entire system
is rotted through with corporate influence and money, PAC's and
lobbyists everywhere. Gradually, the Middle class, on whom both
Republicans and Democrats have spared no effort to weaken (see books
and news commentary by Lou Dobbs), have one thought in mind
irrespective of ideologies - let's get our country back.
> Sure, Microsoft wouldn't be so stupid as to just simply slip cash under
> the table. They would donate to a favorite charity (a front for a
> political action group?). They would fund extravagant projects or
> contribute to pet projects in the appropriate districts (when a pet
> project, such as a theater, sports complex, convention center, or
> museum is well funded, it's a huge vote getter.
It's so easy to donate to great causes when the money has been extorted
through monopolization, acting in restraint of trade, bankrupting or
buying out the compeitition
and using every media trick, lie and distortion (just check out the
original advertised specs for Vista compared with what is actually
being delivered).
Why? Power, it's all about power
but their empire is built on a foundation of patched code, botched
marketing plans,
pretend languages invented solely to kill competing languages and then
dignified by being built by some famous developer or other, vaporware
that had to be turned into real code fast while tossing out the good
code and ideas that got overruled by a committee because it would
conflict with the meshwork of patches of previous patches - a mess so
bad that is the REAL reason why they don't dare publish their source
code.
Sure, Microsoft is not stupid but their show is over. It did'nt end
with the dot com meltdown or because of the fact that Bill got caught
unprepared when a little company called Netscape did some real
innovation, it ended 9/11//2001 when, for the first time, people began
to realize the importance of real security, of organizations that
cooperated instead of competed of a totally different philosophy - the
kind of thing that the British had during the Battle of Britain when a
bunch of ordirnary people with binoculars and a telephone got networked
with the airfields and saved a great nation from being destroyed. Had
they been there, Microsoft would only have mucked things up with
pretend security and make believe protection from an operating system
that is a patchwork quilt of previous quilts with some new material
added to make it look pretty, like the kind of weak nonsense that
Homeland security (sic) offers us right now by checking everyone's
carry on water bottle.
Jimserac
James Pannozzi
|
|
