__/ [ Oliver Wong ] on Wednesday 20 September 2006 17:27 \__
>>> On Wednesday 20 September 2006 15:18 Larry Qualig wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <quote>
> [...]
>>>> The Catch-22 for Microsoft is that security is a huge deal to
>>>> consumers. And, truth be told, the beta versions of its latest security
>>>> tools for Vista -- such as Windows Defender -- are much better
>>>> integrated than the patchwork of third-party stuff that used to muck up
>>>> my machine. But by creating more robust tools to better serve
>>>> consumers' demand for security, Microsoft may run afoul of European
>>>> regulators.
> [...]
>
> "Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:5070283.0cK7Lk8Plz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Motley Fool gives a financial perspective. Don't sweat trying to knock
>> some
>> sense into Suits whose 'knowledge' is speculation over a glass of red
>> wine.
>
> And yet you seem to have no problem citing Motley Fool when they
> cricize
> Microsoft or SCOX or support Linux:
>
> Motley Fool on Hated Stocks (Microsoft Included)
> http://groups.google.ca/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/cb0296416ddd7cfd
^ That's finance
> Motley Fools Calls Microsoft "Dead Money"
> http://groups.google.ca/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/f6de113d8f419494
^ That's finance
> Motley Fool Not Impressed by Microsoft
> http://groups.google.ca/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/5770310d395a4dcb
^ That's finance
> On the Linux-IBM Friendship
> http://groups.google.ca/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/ea423532d05bb7e9
^ That's finance
> Motley Fool Confirms that SCOX is Doomed
> http://groups.google.ca/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/360914552ba3d1b6
^ That's finance
> I don't particularly care much for the "financial perspective". The
> fact
> that Microsoft's stock went down is not particularly interesting to me. And
> this disinterest has nothing to do with Microsoft: If you told me Redhat's
> stock went down, I'd be equally uninterested (does Redhat even trade stocks
> on the public market? I have no idea. That's how little I care about the
> financial perspective).
>
> However, this article Larry brought up IS interesting to me. It doesn't
> mention anything about stocks. Instead, it's about how Microsoft is being
> put into a very unfair position. It's being forbidden by law to bundle
> applications with their OS, and then being criticized for not bundling
> applications with their OS. While Microsoft-sympathizing may be off topic
> in a Linux advocacy group, it's certainly more on topic than reports on how
> MSFT is doing on the stock market this evening.
If you check that critique of a writer who said Microsoft has "virtues", you
will realise that Microsoft was assessed in a supposedly technical way that
analyses its behaviour and ethics. But the author hasn't a clue. He sees
Microsoft as MSFT -- a stock. And /that's/ why I don't accept Motley Fool's
take on Microsoft's history of stifling competition, among other wrongdoing.
I see the same miscomprehension among family that is merely a user of
Microsoft Windows. Just because it's there before you doesn't mean it got
there owing to so-called "virtues".
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | http://en.opensuse.org
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
roy pts/7 Wed Sep 20 13:55 - 13:55 (00:00)
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
|
|
