On Aug 14, 2:25 am, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> Intel & Microsoft Killed the $100 Laptop
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | The article points that the stand taken by Intel and Microsoft is similar to
> | the stand by large drug companies who, instead of working for the illnesses
> | that plague the poor, (such as malaria) choose to focus on low-volume,
> | high-margin drugs for cancer, heart ailments and diabetes.
> `----
Microsoft's bigger fear was that if they could give away a $100 Linux
laptop, that this meant that a similar device could be commercially
marketed for about $300, and at much higher profit than possible with
Windows.
And that's EXACTLY what happened.
ASUS came out with the EEE which it could sell very profitably for
$300 using Linux.
Microsoft tried to convince ASUS to drop Linux and market a Windows XP
version, but XP needed more memory and storage. ASUS ended up selling
BOTH, often side-by-side, and consumers who were able to view the
Linux powered machine were impressed that such a small and inexpensive
machine could be so quick and responsive.
This of course, created a rush for more "NetBooks" which are now being
produced by HP, Lenovo, Dell, and Acer, as well as ASUS, and nearly
all are looking at Linux as a good way to maximize profit from such an
inexpensive machine.
> http://www.techtree.com/India/News/Intel_Microsoft_Killed_the_100_Lap...
> Days ago:
> State Councilor meets Bill Gates, agree to closer collaboration on information,
> education in rural China
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Chinese State Councilor Liu Yandong met with U.S. billionaire Bill Gates and
> | Microsoft's chief executive officers here on Monday, agreeing to a stronger
> | collaboration between the software giant and China's education and science
> | sectors.
> `----
It's the old "stick and carrot" or "good cop, bad cop" routine.
Ballmer can be the bad cop, threatening horrible retaliations unless
they "get back in line", and Gates can be the good cop, offering to
make highly leveraged "donations" of software and even a little
hardware, (such as throw-away computers), to "sweeten the pot".
Microsoft has also been making the XBox in China. Maybe they
threatened to move the operation to Taiwan?
> http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-08/11/content_9171570.htm
> Recent:
> Crimes Microsoft Gets Away With - So Far
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | News publications are cautious about making accusations, and because of that,
> | some nasty acts of Microsoft are essentially being erased from the record.
Print media is fixed. Once it's printed and millions of copies are
circulated, all you can do is print a retraction.
Electronic media on the other hand, is subject to the whims of the
editors. Copy that's offensive to advertisers can be expunged, court
case records against an advertiser can "disappear".
If you want the "Real Story" you have to go back to the original
printed copy, or the exact reproductions of the printed copy. The web
just gives you "history as the advertisers want it to be today".
The irony is that you can't reproduce the printed copy either. All
you can do is cite the original printed periodical, and paraphrase the
article.
> | [...]
> | Microsoft convinced Baystar Capital to put $50 Million dollars into SCO's
> | lawsuit against IBM and other Open Source users, and promised to "backstop"
> | Baystar's investment if SCO lost money, according to this sworn testimony.
So we can add securities fraud to fraud, extortion, blackmail,
sabotage, and obstruction of justice.
> | But I'm told that one person's testimony, even sworn testimony, isn't proof.
> `----
The judge can decide whether or not the person is allowed to testify
in front of a jury, but if the person's testimony appears not to be a
deliberate act of perjury after cross, then he gets to testify in
front of the Jury unless the parties eventually settle.
McBride has already driven his company into bankruptcy. He has no
intention of settling.
On the other hand, if IBM is able to tie Microsoft or it's executives
directly to the SCO financing, then Microsoft may force McBride to
settle for nothing, essentially just giving the executives immunity
from prosecution under criminal statutes by sealing all of the court
records.
> http://technocrat.net/no-cache/d/2008/7/30/46981
> Related:
> Governments Must Reject Gates' $3 Bid to Addict Next Billion PC Users
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | "Microsoft's strategy of getting developing nations hooked on its
> | software was clearly outlined by Bill Gates almost a decade ago," said
> | Con Zymaris, CEO of long-standing open source firm Cybersource.
> | Specifically, Bill Gates, citing China as an example, said:
> | "Although about 3 million computers get sold every year in China, but
> | people don't pay for the software," he said. "Someday they will, though.
> | As long as they are going to steal it, we want them to steal ours.
> | They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out how to
> | collect sometime in the next decade."[1]
> `----
Remember my references to the "Drug Dealer" analogies. This is a good
example. And Microsoft has been using this strategy since about
1982. Get them "addicted" by actually or practically giving it away,
then once they are "hooked" squeeze them for every drop you can get.
But rather than simply going after "cash", Microsoft uses it's squeeze
to get the addicts to make even deeper commitments, to become even
more dependent, and to recruit even more junkies.
In 1984, Bill Gates said he would have everybody so "hooked" on
Microsoft products that he would have total control of their
information, and could use that power to name the rulers of every
nation on earth. How many top leaders have changed since 2000?
|
|
