Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

More Mayhem From MSFT's Mundie

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the as-entertaining-as-he-ever-was dept.

Cally writes "Further embarrasingly lame FUD from Craig Mundie of Microsoft. This time, he claims the GPL is at odds with 'commercialization' of software, without which the government gets a smaller tax take. Looks like he's really talking to legislators there ... He also knocks the Sun-led Liberty Alliance Passport SSO service as 'this notion that the world should be offered an alternative.' An alternative?"

6 of 591 comments (clear)

  1. One cannot help but wonder... by wbav · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If GPL is as bad as Microsoft says it is, why do they keep drawing attention to it?

    I mean, come on, when you continue to talk about something, the idea survives, where as if you ignore it, most of the time, it will just go away.

    --

    =================
    Unix is very user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are.
    1. Re:One cannot help but wonder... by Soko · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I mean, come on, when you continue to talk about something, the idea survives, where as if you ignore it, most of the time, it will just go away.

      They tried that. It didn't work.

      Lots of cool stuff for Linux grew while they were trying to ignore it. Now, they're really, really scared that they will face competition that they can't buy or steal - they will only be able to compete on value and technology.

      As well, Microsoft has always had the paranoid delusions of it's creators and officers. If anything or anyone even gives a sideways glance at thier little girl named Windows, they apply a vicious beating so she can't be lead astray.

      Don't ever forget that "killing Windows is killing Microsoft"*, so it will fight for it's life whenever threatened. The GPLed OS (Linux, to be pendantic) is the only thing that is able to fight back with thet same weapons - so far, anyway.

      Soko

      * This is in quotes since it's not given to be true - the only thing that would go away is the huge, controlling behemoth and it's current business model. there's lots of smart people there tat could generate cash in other ways.

      --
      "Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
  2. Re:GPL by swm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The gov't still gets its cut.

    It gets it from all the companies that have higher profits because they aren't paying the Microsoft tax.

  3. Re:FUD by PD · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did you tell him that Microsoft will soon be out of business because they hire salesmen that insult their customers? Did you ask him if his boss knew that he insulted customers by telling them they will be out of business.

    Good salesmen are helpful people that can help you solve a problem. Salesmen that just try to sell you something are idiots.

    --
    If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
  4. GPL = more taxes, not less by Angst+Badger · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Wow, either Craig Mundie is a total fscking moron, or a baldfaced liar. Less software sold means fewer deductible expenses, and therefore more taxable income and more taxes paid.

    For those of you who don't have the dubious privilege of paying taxes on your business, let me provide a slightly oversimplified explanation. Unlike personal income taxes, businesses pay taxes on their profits, not on the income that ended up going into operating expenses and equipment purchases. (The big exception is payroll, but that's not germane here.) If I use "free" software instead of M$ software, there's nothing for me to deduct. Instead, I have to either invest the money in something else (thereby stimulating the economy, and passing the tax burden to my vendors) or pay taxes on it.

    So do your patriotic duty and use free software!

    --
    Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
  5. Re:Microsoft is concerned about Taxes? by electroniceric · · Score: 5, Insightful
    My point is that "didn't pay corporate tax" is frequently presented as "contributes nothing to society", which is completely untrue.

    Fair enough, but the argument about secondary contributions is so frequently overstated it's nauseating, and usually in the service of public dollars being spent on private moneymaking, like stadiums, corporate relocations, etc.
    A partly rhetorical question:

    • If I commit a crime that requires me to be taken to jail, I'm supporting the (often very lucrative) incarceration industry, and a jails are usually located where jobs are scarce, my murder 1 is particularly beneficial to the community. Should that money be attributed to me?

    And another one:
    • As a community leader, I encourage my community to invest in a vocational training program which produces high quality laborers. These laborers pay taxes and consume goods and services? Should that economic benefit be attributed to me?

    To my mind, the obligations on companies, like people go above and beyond the balance sheet of what they consume (raw resources, human resources, physical, social, legal, educational infrastructure) - they are part of society, and have a duty to help others in society, as do the rest of us. So the current climate of heaping accolades on companies because one of the things they happen to need is people to work jobs drives me nuts, as it suggests that having made jobs, companies are off the hook for any more helping out.