Mark Kent <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> ____/ waterskidoo on Wednesday 08 August 2007 16:06 : \____
>>
>>> On 2007-08-08, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Tuesday 07 August 2007 19:36 : \____
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not necessarily. Some people condemn this, but I personally do not. It's a
>>>> tad unfortunate, but it's an important step nonethelss. Lenovo already has
>>>> Ubuntu and Fedora certified for the newest laptop. This means that later on
>>>> there will be choice. You will not be forced to pay SLED tax, part of which
>>>> goes to Ballmer's bank account.
>>>
>>> I respect your opinion Roy and though I wish it were a better deal,
>>> at least Linux is being loaded instead of Windows.
>>> Every system that leaves with Linux is one less locked in Windows
>>> system.
>>
>> Yes, and some people will replace it with other distributions. It's just sad
>> that Microsoft plans to make money from sales of a rival actually materialise.
>> If you wish, I can post a link to a half-and-hour video on antitrust. It shows
>> not only Microsoft in a short segment, but it also provides history, including
>> cases where Bell and the rail system made money no matter who you paid to.
>> They overwhelm and literally _own_ the market this way. This is the mother of
>> all abuses. Imagine having America earning money every time a Nigerian boy
>> buys some bread at the local shop. It's invasion. It's exploitation that is
>> worse than the equivalent of colonies.
>>
>
> But if we have binary drivers, then we will be locked in to those
> drivers. Surely this is obvious?
Then don't use them you complete and utter loony. Stick with your
ridiculous Intel onboard chip while the rest of us enjoy OpenGL heaven.
|
|
