Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:49:34 -0600, Sinister Midget wrote:
>
>> On 2008-02-25, Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> claimed:
>>> On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:44:59 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>> Intuit Isn't Recession-Proof
>>>>
>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>>| When Intuit grew worried it was losing market share of its TurboTax
>>>>| tax preparation software to cheaply priced competitors, the company
>>>>| boosted its marketing campaign and its sales rose. But on Thursday
>>>>| after the bell, Intuit announced that its second-quarter earnings
>>>>| tumbled as increasing costs overshadowed robust sales of TurboTax.
>>>> `----
>>>>
>>>>
http://www.forbes.com/2008/02/22/intuit-financial-software-markets-technology-cx-ra-0222markets25.html?partner=yahootix
>>>>
>>>> It's the gradual demise of the proprietary software monopoly and
>>>> legacy.
>>>
>>> Earth to Roy. Come in Roy.
>>>
>>> Intuit was losing sales to *OTHER PROPRIETARY TAX PRODUCTS*, not open
>>> source ones (of which there are none that I am aware of).
>>>
>>> Therefore your comment is not only disingenuous, it's outright
>>> dishonest.
>>
>> Where did he mention open source? I didn't cut a thing. See if you can
>> find Waldo.
>
> Roy was claiming that Intuit's losses were because the "proprietary
> software monopoly and legacy" is in a gradual demise, meaning of course
> that non-proprietary or open source is replacing it, but the article was
> about Intuit's sales dropping because other proprietary tax products are
> selling cheaper.
Which was exactly his subject line, if you had bothered to actually read
what you are replying to
--
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice which can be equally well
explained by stupidity
|
|
