On 2009-06-30, Hans Lister <stymeeee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 08:03:43 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>> Rex Ballard stated in post
>> be915a1c-1ad5-423c-a210-6714fedaef59@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 6/30/09
>> 7:57 AM:
>>
>>> On Jun 25, 11:14 pm, Snit <use...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Rex Ballard stated in post
>>>> 820b7f89-8eff-4136-911c-edf784875...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 6/25/09
>>>> 7:59 PM:
>>>>> On Jun 25, 3:43 pm, Snit <use...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>> Rick stated in post 97SdnVjyhNwuUt7XnZ2dnUVZ_s6dn...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on
>>>>>> 6/25/09 12:27 PM:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 14:47:32 -0400, Hans Lister wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:42:52 -0500, Rick wrote:
>>>>>>>> When you can't give away something that is free, you have a serious
>>>>>>>> problem on your hands.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Your major problem is your lack of honesty.
>>>>
>>>>>> How does a monopoly out-compete *free*?
>>>
>>> OK, I'll bottom line it for you.
>>>
>>> To out-compete "free", you spend 30 years using the same tactics drug
>>> users use to get customers addicted to your products, with no
>>> substitutes available because you "kill off" all the competitors. In
>>> Microsoft's case, they simply drove competitors and uncooperative
>>> partners into bankruptcy.
>>
>> How do you drive "free" into bankruptcy? Is Linux really heading that way?
>
> Something has to be pretty darn bad if it can't be given away
> for free.
> That something is Linux.
Nope. Companies pay $1000 per seat for Linux.
Try another lie.
[deletia]
--
Linux: because everyone should get to drink the beer of their |||
choice and not merely be limited to pretensious imports or hard cider. / | \
|
|
