Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> ____/ Mark Kent on Wednesday 05 September 2007 11:12 : \____
>
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Wednesday 05 September 2007 09:31 : \____
>>>
>>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Tuesday 04 September 2007 18:35 : \____
>>>>>
>>>>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>>>>> ____/ [H]omer on Tuesday 04 September 2007 14:22 : \____
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>>>>>>>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Tuesday 04 September 2007 12:08 : \____
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And Ashley Highfield believes that Microsoft will write a linux
>>>>>>>>>> version of the Microsoft iPlayer?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No, now he just escapes the question by saying something like "I
>>>>>>>>> believe in universality, but..."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "...I believe in money and corruption even more."?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He must have said that off line or off camera. Maybe he'd say something
>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "...but I have a wife and 3 children to feed".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Perfect excuse for criminals.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As £130 Million has made its way to Microsoft, I wonder if any has been
>>>>>> making it /back/ to the trustees and Mr Highfield? Is there financial
>>>>>> corruption going on here?
>>>>>
>>>>> Probably. That's how OOXML/ISO fiasco worked as well. Microsoft sends
>>>>> E-mails to third-world country asking them to E-mail ISO with a
>>>>> last-minute vote on OOMXL (guess in whose favour). In return...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There must be some reason why Ashley Highfield would be deliberately
>>>> choosing to back a system which is never likely to work with anything
>>>> other than a particular flavour of Microsoft's operating system. We
>>>> really are left with incompetence (so sack him) or corrruption (sack him
>>>> and prosecute).
>>>
>>> One person whom I can't name is looking into this. There's apparently a
>>> broader plan.
>>
>> Good - it warrants a proper investigation. I wonder if one of the ITV
>> investigative journalistic programmes might want to take up this cause?
>> Unfortunately, I have a sneaking suspicion that they've abandoned their
>> flagship investigative programmes - World in Action and This Week, both
>> of which were very good.
>>
>> Maybe "Which" might be interested?
>
> I believe that ITV pulled a BBC as well.
>
>>> Why should Brits be urged to ditch Windows 2000 to access content thet
>>> have already paid for?
>>>
>>
>> The whole situation is beyond my comprehension - the same problem also
>> exists at the British Library and the National Archives, which appear
>> to want to sell out to a foreign company. Can you imagine this - we'll
>> have foreigners managing access to hundreds of years of Hansard... this
>> is the root of our democracy, and next to the Isle of Man, the oldest
>> parliament on the planet. We are giving it to, err, well, a convicted
>> monopolist to manage. Actually, we're not giving it, we're *paying*
>> them to take it away from us.
>
> They pay us back. Well... errr... some of us... very few of us... Ashley must
> be a happy puppy.
>
> It's a similar situation with companies like Xandros. They destroy a
> society/community by paying one person to screw everybody else.
>
There's always someone prepared to do it, too. Still, we have some of
them here as trolls, so I should not be too surprised.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |
|
|
