OT: The semantics of the terms PC/Mac

[Douglas Pollard]

Odd wrote:
> Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
>   
>> On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 22:29:06 +0200
>> Odd <iodine at runbox.no> wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> Some of us don't have the luxury of being idealists. Some of
>>> use need to use Windows to put food on the table. So please
>>> get off your high horse and try to understand that things work
>>> differently in the real world. It's not as easy as you imagine.
>>>       
>> I fail to understand the high-horseyness of refusing to be a part of
>> criminality, whatever the source.
>>     
>
> Well, that's your problem. You're not a part of criminality just
> because you use an operating system. That's just silly.
>
>   
>> Would you work for the <insert your
>> own term for organized crime here> just to put food on your table if
>> there were other places to work (and there are)?  Same-same with
>> Microsoft, ISTM.
>>     
>
> You're being naive. If you exlude every job where you need to use
> Microsoft, there are few options left, especially in IT. Like I said
> not all have the luxury of being idealists. You do, apparently.
> I resent your holier than thou attitude to people less fortunate
> than you.
>
>   
>> Yes, this /is/ the real world and I /am/, hopefully, a reasonable
>> influence on my own children.
>>     
>
> Your deluding yourself and them and gravely exaggerating the
> situation. You're actually doing your kids a disservice.
> Hopefully they won't become zealots like you.
>
>   
>> I wouldn't want them to see me catering
>> to criminality in /any/ fashion.  Don't you feel that way about your
>> own influence on your children's lives?
>>     
>
> No. I tell them the truth and let them choose for themselves.
>
>   
>> Really, is it so wrong to call this as I see it when the facts bear me
>> out?
>>     
>
> It's wrong when you're being fanatical about it. The world isn't
> black and white.
>
>   
>> http://www.v3.co.uk/vnunet/news/2118681/microsoft-convicted-software-piracy
>> http://www.counterpunch.org/adler10012007.html
>> http://www.twoengineers.com/Richard/ms-conclusions.html
>> http://boycottnovell.com/2009/04/10/microsoft-office-crimes/
>>     
>
>   
    It is my opinion that Microsoft is a really good business model.  
They know how to run a corporation, they know how to market their 
product and thy know how to walk the thin line between legal and illegal 
they are shrewed and smart.   They have a good product in Office and 
they have been able to make a flawed program Windows the world 
standard.  Any smart business man walks that line between paying to much 
in taxes and income tax evasion and has made hard calculations that pays 
off for their stock holders..  He may well go into court and have  his 
fingers slapped though.  That doesn't make him a criminal unless he 
refuses to pay his fine. Anti trust is the same, every company that can 
walk on the edge rightly does so.    
     Anti trust laws are not designed to put anyone in jail or break any 
company but instead to make them wary of stepping over the line.  The 
fines are pretty minamal and the worst part of it is it makes the exec 
get red in the face for getting caught. That's hard on his reputation 
and too much of that may relegate him to the golf course.
     You have to remember that every capitalist believes that anti trust 
laws are immoral.  Especially when you consider that only Government can 
make a monopoly out of a company and then turn around and fine them for 
being one.  Every Patent and every copyright is a gift of a monopoly for 
some period of time and the later is for about 150 years so at least in 
this case, the Government approves. Capitalism works best for everyone 
when left alone by Government.  All the smaller companies clawing their 
way to the top pull the big, over complicated companies down. 
    The first bankruptcy laws were to protect a companies creditors when 
the company went bust.  The law was changed to protect the company 
owners so that they didn't loose their homes and bank accounts etc. when 
their company failed. Now days we throw the creditors to the wolves and 
take care of the execs.  As a Result of this many got to big to fail. 
They would be a lot more careful were they been responsible for their 
actions. Some would have failed years ago when they were smaller.
    Do I like Microsoft ?  No!  But I sure would like to have several 
million dollars worth of their stock, though I wouldn't give another 
nickel for windows. 
                                                                         
                                                                    Doug