Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> Linonut on Friday
>> Richard Rasker belched:
>>
>>> And so on and so on ... I patiently demonstrated everything and answered
>>> all their questions - all but te final one: "But why do people keep
>>> paying for Windows when you can get all this for free?" This turned out
>>> to be the only question I couldn't answer in a satisfactory manner ...
>>
>> Just point them to this link:
>>
>> http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=95000750
>>
>> Court Ruling Was No Victory For Microsoft
<SNIP>
>> Microsoft's response to the legal threat it continues to face is to
>> unleash a swarm of lobbyists and lawyers upon the administration and
>> Congress to urge a quick settlement. Judging from its past
>> negotiations with the Department of Justice, the company will not
>> accept any settlement that seriously inhibits its ability to engage
>> in predation.
>
> Get a load of this. Just published and I suspect it will receive less
> attention than deserved.
>
> Changing the (Federal) Report, After the Vote
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | That agreement was nearly imperiled last weekend, though. Gerri
> | Elliott, corporate vice president at Microsoft's Worldwide Public
> | Sector division, sent an e-mail message to fellow commissioners Friday
> | evening saying that she "vigorously" objected to a paragraph in which
> | the panel embraced and encouraged the development of open source
> | software and open content projects in higher education. The paragraph
> | read like this:
> |
> | "The commission encourages the creation of incentives to promote
> | the development of open-source and open-content projects at universities
> | and colleges across the United States, enabling the open sharing of
> | educational materials from a variety of institutions, disciplines, and
> | educational perspectives. Such a portal could stimulate innovation, and
> | serve as the leading resource for teaching and learning. New initiatives
> | such as OpenCourseWare, the Open Learning Initiative, the Sakai Project,
> | and the Google Book project hold out the potential of providing
> | universal access both to general knowledge and to higher education."
> `----
>
> http://insidehighered.com/news/2006/09/01/commission
Yes, this is disturbing. Open Source effort developed by college students
and staff for industry, research, educational learning, ancillary products
for promoting the arts, etc. are appropriate and will further learning more
than a proprietary product will. Open Source sharing of projects will
enhance further innovation and growth, without concern for violating
intellectual material.
Initially we saw Bill Gates' BASIC interpreter on the multitude of home
computers, which spelled innovation and creativity. Students, teachers,
soccer moms, businessmen and scientists were avidly involved with
developing and learning with access to computer resources, which only some
offices and classrooms had access to. People were learning graphics
programming basics, I/O access, database construction, etc.
However, future Microsoft products did away with basic tools of learning,
such as with BASIC, DEBUG, etc., and sold was an expectation to leave the
programming to professions and remainder to be simple application users.
Reading between the lines, now it sounds like they want to take learning out
of the colleges and universities.
--
HPT
|
|
