On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 08:29:53 +0100, Mark Kent wrote:
> William Poaster <wp@xxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> [H]omer wrote:
>>
>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>>>> ____/ Kier on Wednesday 24 October 2007 11:09 : \____
>>>
>>>>> It's time to stop blaming MS for everything
>>>
>>> Another fine post from Kier the "Linux advocate", who spends his time
>>> feeding the Trolls, and apologising for Microsoft and its supporters.
>>>
>>> Well congratulations, you are no longer simply a Troll feeder IMO, you
>>> are now an actual Troll. If you are so in love with Sweaty Ballmer and
>>> his violently destructive company, then why don't you piss off to
>>> Windows la-la land, and stop criticising every damn word that anyone
>>> dares to use against the Microsoft crime syndicate?
>>>
>>> Go on, let's hear some more apologies and excuses for Microsoft. It's
>>> what you're good at.
>>>
>>>> Again, first-class corruption. Microsoft is part of a phenomenon and
>>>> a pattern. It is not *the* problem, but /part/ of the problem. Being
>>>> part of the problem is still being a problem, no matter how you think
>>>> about it.
>>>
>>> £130 Million pounds of taxpayers' money wasted on unnecessary Microsoft
>>> technology, and hiring senior ex-Microsoft employees to pervert the BBC
>>> media infrastructure, would be major contributing factors.
>>
>> Twice that amount, I believe. It would seem that at *least* £280million has
>> been handed to M$, for one thing or another.
>> Put into context, the annual BBC3 budget is £93.4 million, & BBC4 is £46.8
>> million. Just imagine the programs they could have made for BBC1 & 2 with
>> that £280 million they squandered.
>>
>> According to 2006 figures, the BBC had a £4.5 billion budget from licence
>> fees *alone*. In 2007 it's estimated to be £4.68 billion. It *also* gets
>> revenue from its commercial subsidiary BBC Worldwide.
>>
>>
>
> How anyone, even Kier, could possibly argue that passing £280 Millions
> of our licence-fee cash would not result in layoffs in an environment of
> capped licence-fee increases is quite beyond me.
Idiot, I am not doing any such thing. Merely pointing out that MS is not
responsible for everything bad that happens. And that by blaming MS for
everything bad, you are missing all the other causes.
In addition, nowhere, absolutely NOWHERE, have I praised the iPlayer and
the its connections with MS. Ever. In fact, I when I emailed Click, to
complain there wasn't anough Linux coverage in the programme, I registered
my dislike of the whole idea.
>
> That the BBC are trying to blame the licence-fee cap for this shows just
> how completely dishonest and corrupt that organisation has become -
> they've fully embraced the Microsoft Integrity Model. I feel very sorry
> indeed for the 2,500 people who are now going to be looking for another
> job, whilst £280 million of our cash is lounging around in Microsoft
> bank accounts, for the delivery, of, well, *nothing at all*. The BBC
> owns *nothing* from its investment of £280 millions of our money.
>
> Kier - please, these are *real people* who've lost their jobs, in order
> to feed the Redmond machine. They have families, mortgages, spouses,
> children, elderly parents, gas, leccy bills, cars and food bills all to
> support. This isn't something for you to apologise for, this is *real*.
Don't pull that emotive sob-story stuff on me. I am quite well aware they
are real people. And I am NOT 'apologising for MS'. HOw many more times do
you need to be told?
>
> Furthermore, it's your money and my money which is being sent to Mr
> Ballmer, and Microsoft is delivering, err, it's player which it was
> delivering anyway. In binary. Nothing for the BBC to own. No source
> code, no possibility of going to another vendor. No possibility to
> change integrator. Licensing (rtu) fee to pay each time anyone even
> views something with the "silverlight" player, pay to whom? Yes, to
> Microsoft. So the £280 millions is going to rise rapidly, as Microsoft
> own more and more of our licence-fee money.
Do you actually *know* anything about this? DO you, for instance, have
inside information about everything that goes on in the BBC? Or are you
merely dreaming up worst-case scenarios because you hate MS?
>
> What will you say when the last technical people at the BBC are given
> their P.45s?
The BBC needs to get it's house in order, certainly. I am certain it will.
--
Kier
|
|
