Microsoft Hatred FAQ
wookie at aces.localdomain
Tue Oct 25 22:33:33 CEST 2005
In <435E8C5A.5030105 at sun.removeme.com> Brian Utterback:
> that the laws have been in place since the late 1800's, the consent
> decree explicitly and in no uncertain terms informed them of their
> violations, and they continued to violate the law even afterward.
It's M$ corporate DNA; they literally couldn't change and survive:
Howard University law professor Andrew Gavil said he wonders whether
Microsoft's early demands -- which would have compelled manufacturers
to distribute to consumers only Microsoft's Windows Media Player
software -- were a genuine mistake or a signal the company intends to
revert to its hardball tactics.
"It's somewhat amazing it even happened," said Gavil, who has closely
followed the Microsoft case. "It's troubling that anyone inside
Microsoft was still thinking this was a legitimate business strategy."
Well, duh. All they got was a useless wrist-slap from the dickless US DOJ
in 2002, so this is not at all surprising--just bidness as usual for M$.
And any M$ apologists are just as much liars and thieves as M$ itself.
Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
Really, it's (wyrd) at airmail, dotted with net. DO NOT SPAM IT.
Kids jumping ship? Looking to hire an old-school type? Email me.
More information about the Python-list