Micoshaft asstroturfing fraudster pounding the sock Hadron
wrote on behalf of Half Wits from Micoshaft Department of Marketing:
"Phil Da Lick!" <phil_the_lick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
William Poaster wrote:
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 16:29:33 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
Hadron wrote:
Sure. Pay lots of programmers to port it and then give it to the
competition! No wonder your little nanobot business tanked.
Here we go folks. Another stinker from our resident "True Linux
Advocate".
You have no idea how freedom works.
Quack got upset when he saw "University" in the subject line.
Quack doesn't like freedom either, doesn't like choice...wtf *does* the
troll like? Oh, of course, M$ Windoze.
True fuckwit. He keeps banging on about the cost of development of
products like he's some kind of business expert. Business 101 tells us
that not all projects succeed and the risks need to be analyzed
carefully in order to succeed. But no, let's let all the big
Where would I disagree with that? of course one needs to analyse. But
having been a SW developer for many years I know the costs involved.
Really? You fooled me!
I thought you were just an asstroturfer but now I know you
to be just a liar!!!
I am a SW/HW developer and I know the costs are a lot lower
with open source. From schools to governments, they would
save a lot more money employing open source developers
that specify, commission and get into production
open source based software and products than ever listening
to WINDUMMIES like you, letting them near a cheque book or
allowing them to specify anything without being overseen
by open source project managers.
