On Aug 18, 9:18 pm, "Ezekiel" <z...@xxxxx> wrote:
> "Rex Ballard" <rex.ball...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>
> news:ba3620d7-78c2-4b1a-850b-5208b4004493@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> > And in 2000, when Windows ME was falling on it's face, a LOT of people
> > were looking very seriously at Linux. Many corporations were happy
> > with Windows 2000 and were looking at ways to add Linux to the mix.
> > They had service contracts that included free upgrades to Windows 2000, so
> > they thought they had plenty of money to explore Linux as an
> > alternative for both servers and desktops.
> > Microsoft retaliated by tripling the price for support contracts,
> > giving corporate customers 30 days to accept the upgraded contracts,
> > or Microsoft would terminate all support and they would have to buy
> > new licenses if they wanted XP.
> I'm sure that you have a URL or a "anonymous email from a reliable source"
> to backup your bullshit. Right? I searched the web and couldn't find diddly
> on MS tripling the cost of support contracts.
ComputerWorld, InfoWeek, E-Week, and most of the weekly computer trade
journals covered these details, which would have happened right after
XP was released. I believe that would have been October or November
of 2000.
You will have to find print copies, or exact duplicates of the print
copies, because the publishers do not keep accurate archives of their
print versions, and the on-line versions are subject to the whims of
their advertizers, available storage space, and other works.
Furthermore, since it was copyrighted work, even if I had the exact
content, I couldn't publish it to the web without getting a valid
copyright license to publish it in that manner.
If Microsoft really wants to give Google "a run for their money", they
should contract with all of the magazines whose advertizing they buy,
and get permission to archive and republish the full content of all of
these galleys for 20 years. If they could resist the temptation to
"sanitize" the content, the ability to get these bits of history,
coupled with advertizing that is tightly coupled to the requested
subject, they could generate some significant revenue.
> I suspect that you are once again lying.
OUCH! You must be reeling in pain. You either can't refute my
statements because you have no experience of anything but Windows from
any of that period, or you know that my statements are absolutely
true, and know that you would trigger a flood of Roy Schestowitz posts
contradicting you if you attempted to claim any other facts.
Keep in mind that these weren't the front-page stories. In many
cases, they were almost in the middle of each periodical, or at least
on the second or third page. The headline stories at the time were
about how Microsoft was being slapped silly by Judge Thomas Penfield
Jackson and his Findings of Fact, Findings of Law, and Final
Judgment. There was also a little story about the recount effort in
Florida and how it might have an impact on the outcome of the 2000
election.
> The same way you lied when you
> claimed that you invented the web-browser, and when you claimed that you
> invented SSL and http and when you claimed that you invented Java and when
> you claimed that Martin Marietta broke into your high school locker in order
> to steal plans for a new weapon from you.
Don't believe everything the WinTrolls tell you in this group. I
didn't make those claims.
Here is exactly where these inflated claims are generated from
http://www.open4success.org/bio/
In short, I participated in usenet newsgroups and mailing lists that
were also read by many of the folks who actually DID invent those
things. We participated in some interesting conversations, I
described the process and the principles, and the public domain
information was used as the basis for a working implementation.
As public domain information, it was theirs to use as they saw fit.
Netscape offered my a Job, Sun offered me a job, and IBM offered me a
job, which I took.
I was also offered a job with Martin Marietta, along with a full 5
year scholarship to CU school of engineering.
And it was an Air Force officer checking the lockers, probably
investigating about 20 of us who had ham radio licenses, and a few of
us who had direct access to Lowry Air Force base (my father had a
Colonel sticker on the bumper of his car). It's not like they didn't
have just cause for the search.
I did have air force materials, but they were introductory electronics
to help classmates pass their general class amateur radio theory
examination. That was back in 1970? I was in 9th grade and it was in
April.
|
|
