Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's Big Stick in Peru
An anonymous reader points out a Wired story on the continuing Peru saga. In this latest episode, Wired notes that the U.S. Ambassador to Peru has chimed in in support of Microsoft and in opposition to Dr. Villanueva's bill which would have mandated open source software be used by the Peruvian government. On the one hand, sure, our diplomats have a national goal of promoting U.S. enterprise, but do we have to promote companies which we are simultaneously pursuing in court for numerous violations of our laws? Isn't that a bit counter-productive?
For some reason, I read that as "Microsoft pig stuck in Peru." I got very confused..
slashdot!=valid HTML
God I love our government.
I know everyone hates Microsoft but they are a big corporation and they do have a major influence on the rest of the American economy. Right now, the US needs Microsoft.
(Sorry if this is a tad offtopic, but...)
The more I hear about stories like these, the more I think we need campaign finiance reform. Think how much more productive and progressive our laws would be if our senators weren't owned by companies. The problem I see with my fellow americans is that we tend to be, for lack of a better word, shallow. For most, memory of things political is only a few months at best. Further, yes, occasionally you get something like CBDTBA (or whatever it was named) that cause outrage, but the underlying problem - that most congressmen are owned my big cooperations (particularly republican, but democrats aren't immune either) - is the one that never gets solved.
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
Our economy does not need Microsoft. Just think of how much worse it would be if Microsoft also got caught with some corporate scandel (aside from this monopoly thing). Have you not noticed it only took a few huge companies, not many small diversified companies, to make our markets collapse.
Jesus saves souls and redeems them for valuable cash prizes
Some of you with jobs may disagree with me, but for the rest of the slashdotters out there, this is for you!
We've all seen people hurt by this economy. A family member, a friend, hell maybe a lover. Point is it's about time americans put a stop to H1-B's and foriegn outsourcing.
The people running these big corporations for the last 30 years must be shortsighted, because this has been happening since the 70's in more fields than just computing. Look at where that intel chip is being manufactured, more than likely in malasia!
Now we let it happen with our coding. How many spams a day have you recieved for, "Hire cheap indian coders! ASP, VB, C++ for just 20dollars a day?" We can no longer sit by and watch the corporations lie when they say "But we can't find any qualified people over here.
Look, I don't like M$ any more than the rest of you. 7 years of being a M$ jumpin fire monkey, I am BURNED OUT. I don't give a crap about why outlook crashes or how do you do something in word anymore. I've since moved onto higher things. Point is though, that was a job for me, taught me a lot, it let me grow in both my personal and financial life, here in USA.
If M$ wants to take it to peru, let them. As long as they keep the coders here working. Hey I know a lot of bi-lingual (spanish/english) coders live right here in San Jose, M$ has an office here. If they had to expand their support for more bi-lingual support it would create a lot of jobs around here. Sorry, but after a year of eatin ramen noodles to make house payments, I don't see nothing wrong in that.
...this is wrong.
Sure, it is our government's job to promote the US's interests, but Peru is right to stand up to the pressure.
Paying for software should take a back seat to paying for water and electricity.
I think mandating Open Source is a bit much, but maybe that's what they have to do to keep their departments from deviating.
I own and run MS products (Win2K, Win2K Server, XP Home, XP Pro, SQL Server 7.0, VB Studio 6.0, etc.) I like them. I haven't had any real pain from them. But I couldn't go buy them today. If I was Peru I'd want Free Software.
But that's not what this is about. Peru didn't mandate Linux. They simply said all software must come with source, which effectively cuts out MS. It's an implicit endorsement of Open Source, but not an explicit one.
Writers imply. Readers infer.
Sounds like some kind of "domino theory" to me. If one country is falling, the rest will follow.
;)
Once the communists in vietnam, now open source in peru. What a bad century for america
And you wouldn't want to risk those potential 15,000 jobs, now would you? No matter that any real employment will be exported to the US. No, don't bother thinking about that...
We're in sad, sad times.
In his June letter, Hamilton said that while the United States doesn't oppose the development of open-source software, it prefers to support a free market where the quality of the product can determine the issue.
This makes no sense, on many levels! First of all, any company can supply open-source software. In no way does this create any barrier to any company. Even Microsoft can submit software for this purpose.
To me this quote is the same as: "Hamilton said that while the United States doesn't oppose the development of green army tanks, it prefers to support a free market where the quality of the product can determine the color." Makes no sense! Anyone can write open-source software.
Microsoft is a monopoly, an illegal one at that, so hearing them talk about free markets is damn funny.
On another level, open-source software is closer to a situation where there are no copyrights, in other words, a true free market. Copyright monopolies are exactly that, monopolies. If you need your software serviced, you have to call exactly one company for permission (or even to have the work done). You have more freedom with open-source than proprietary software. Governments should be supporting freedom!
Of course, I'm not surprised. Microsoft did the same thing in Mexico. Free markets, my ass. Microsoft is just buying their way in and taking advantage of poorer countries.
"Hamilton said that while the United States doesn't oppose the development of open-source software, it prefers to support a free market where the quality of the product can determine the issue. "
Like MPAA, RIAA, etc, etc.
"Free-software advocates also claim that besides the operational advantages, open-source programs are less costly, a claim that has been energetically denied by Microsoft Peru."
Maybe I just don't get this. If I can download it or obtain it for free and use it and modify it in any way I see fit (releasing code if I redistribute), how is that not less costly then buying a MS product, paying for licences to mod it and then paying again to redistribute it (if required)?
Feel the fear and do it anyway.
Ok as much as some people are going to hate this point of view, but I think it is ok for the American Ambassador to talk to the Peruvian government. But and this is where I think the ambassador went over the line, the ambassador should not have an opinion. The ambassador represents a country and yes Microsoft belongs to a specific country. Hence it is the job of the ambassador to help Microsoft. But I think only insofar to open doors so that Microsoft can talk to the right people. Likewise the ambassador should do the same if Richard Stallman were to have an opinion and what to express it to the Peruvian government. Richard Stallman is an American and has as much right as Microsoft.
But sadly this American Administration is more interested in serving big business and not the people. Was that to be expected? Yes after Bush received 350 million in support what else could you expect? Talk about "Indulgence"!!!
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
While I don't think Microsoft's software should be accepted by Peru simply because they're Microsoft, I think that saying the US government should not support Microsoft because Microsoft broke some anti-trust laws is a bit naive, even for open-source folks. The ambassador does have an interest to promote the interests of this country, and certainly promoting Microsoft does that, but it really has nothing to do with lining Microsoft's coffers (tax breaks and kickbacks do more than any puny Peruvian contract will do). It has more to do with the economy generated by Microsoft.
Think about exactly how much of our technological economy is based on Microsoft. The world's leading computer manufacturers (Dell, HP, Compaq, etc.) ship Microsoft-based systems. They provide support (which means jobs) for those systems. Dell has already tried shipping Linux systems and it failed miserably for them. Other companies have met limited success (what is VA Linux doing now?). Think about how many Windows admins there are for every Unix admin. Those people don't work for Microsoft, and they generate a huge amount of IT service domestic product. What about all the software houses that write software (some of which would undoubtedly be used in Peru) for Windows not because Windows is the best, but simply because it's the most ubiquitous?.
If you cut out Microsoft from *consideration*, you cut out huge areas of the US service industry. Can Dell make Linux-capable boxen? Sure. Is it in their best interests on a limited scale? History has shown no. Are their Linux IT companies to help the Peruvian government manage their systems? Yes. Are they chances good they'll be around in six months? It's iffy, given the poor track record of open-source company management and the relative unprofessionalism that the industry (perceptionally) seems mired in.
THe ambassador is not saying, "Accept Microsoft." He's saying "Don't shut out consideration of Microsoft by mandating an open-source regulation." Let free trade and market forces ("Is it a better product?" or "Is it a better deal?" or "Is it better service-wise?") determine which technology to choose, not some ideology. That's a capitalist mentality, true, but it's one that's allowed the growth of open-source in this country in some areas, and the last time I checked, Peru had an economy based on capitalism.
There goes my dream of getting a job in Peru =)
Not more than you need, just more than you want
If Peru wants to pay the Microsoft tax instead of using that money on other projects that I'm sure their country needs/wishes to fund, screw 'em.
:p
I'm not surprised one bit that the US ambassador is shoving propaganda for Microsoft. Why wouldn't he? It's a US-based corp.
What, our politicians aren't supposed to throw US interests onto other countries? Hah. Where have you been the past few hundred years?
It's called bullshit...
The government and corporations excel at it. Its in their best interest. People are the peons. We are a mass of consumers that need to be controlled for maximum cash/power extraction to these entities. Pull the wool over our eyes and talk soothingly and we won't realize we're being raped until our assholes start to tear.
Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
Anyone else think /. should change the Microsoft icon from Gates of Borg to a picture of Gates handing politicians large amounts of cash?
It used to be that the U.S. was known for promoting freedom, in the guise of democracy and free markets, to other countries. Now, we have our diplomats promoting to keep those same countries in the grasp of a predatory monopolist that we ourselves convicted.
They can say they're not against free software all they want, but the industry they're promoting is not one that is known for giving freedoms to its users and it one that is clearly afraid of the true freedom that free software can give.
Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
This isn't a very good argument, at least on its face. If you were being unfairly imprisioned in another country, it wouldn't be right for the US State Department to refuse to help you because you had unresolved legal problems back in the US (asuming you're not a fugitive). It might undermine their ability to help you, but the State department's job is to look out for US interests in other countries, not to apply self interpreted legal punishment on people and corperations.
This is a teeny tiny favor compared to the lenient settlement they got from the Justice Department.
Microsoft apparently enlisted the American ambassador in Lima to help try and convince the Peruvians to kill the legislation.
I don't think I could put it much more accuratly than that!
I stole this Sig
Compared to what shell corp has done in Africa, Microsoft selling their product in another country is nothing. They are still in court, and can continue as they wish outside of the US or inside the US until the courts say otherwise.
What?
Curious phrase for Slashdot to use, considering this non-anonymous reader (i.e. me) submitted the same story a few hours ago.
On the one hand, sure, our diplomats have a national goal of promoting U.S. enterprise, but do we have to promote companies which we are simultaneously pursuing in court for numerous violations of our laws?
Actually, these days I think this is a catch-22, if you want to promote U.S. enterprise, by definition you've pretty much gotta support the ones in court.
Seriously, though, it would be hard to define such a standard (at least for big business) since large enough companies are almost always the target of some sort of litigation or investigation, many of which are small or without merit, and are simply a function of their size, history, numerous divisions, and the law of numbers when they employ thousands of individuals. I'm not going shed tears for big business, but even corporations should be considered innocent until proven guilty, and even for the guilty ones government officials should not seek to impose extra-legal restrictions and punishments beyond whatever punishments are decided in court (although as citizens and consumers we are always free to voice our opinion and deny them our business and government agencies should evaluate potential suppliers based on past conduct).
That being said, the adoption of open source software abroad should have positive economic benefits to North America: with the bulk of open source developers based in the U.S. there is probably a quantifiable net benefit to skills and innovation as well as benefits to the many small businesses that rely on open source products and service for productivity gains and revenue. Politicians should be encouraged to promote this industry as well, especially with small business being the real lifeblood of the economy.
My next sig will be ready soon, but friends can beat the rush!
Knowing the United States less than honorable track record in Latin and South America, I find it almost funny the article would talk about a US Ambassador trying to "convine" Peru. What is the US going to do? Bomb them for not running Minesweeper and Solitare on their desktops? The irony of the situation is gigantic.
For those who think the US has every right to pursue pushing its own companies, that's fine. But I would hope that we would push companies in compliance with our own laws. Regardless, I would still like to see Linux in Peru.
I'll play devil's advocate. Isn't it partially the responsibility of our ambassador to promote trade with Peru? Why would an ambassador tell a country to take action to decrease the import from the US?
Not that I agree with what our ambassador said, but I thought I'd just throw this out there.
I know I might get modded down for being a troll, but this is an honest question that I wish to pose.
qslack.com
Maybe it's a nuance of translation from Spanish to English, but Mr. Villaneuva constantly refering to Bill Gates as "the Bill" was confusing. And I disagree with many of the things Villaneuva had to say about him.
"The Bill does not introduce any discrimination whatever", "The Bill protects equality under the law", "The Bill makes it compulsory for all public bodies to use only free software" - As far as I know, Mr. Gates doesn't do any of these things, strange that the Peruvian government thinks so.
For anyone that needs to know what the US did in those areas, do a google search for John Negroponte, Reagan, Nicaragua, Chomsky.
How is that Microsoft's actions to stop Linux mimics those actions of the U.S. trying to stop the "fall" of Southeast Asia to Communism. Weird huh?
the US Government is NOT going to kill microsoft, no matter what the zealots here want. It makes zero sense. The same as the government didn't kill AT&T or Standard Oil. They split them up, and
the sum of the parts was MUCH greater than the original (this is the reason that companies often CHOOSE to split themselves... see lucent/bell-labs,3com/palm. So if peru goes open source US economy suffers (regardless of the anti-trust litigation against MSFT). If Peru goes with MSFT we win, if they go with MSFT, and we split them up, we win twice as much. Simple economics.
No, I'm not a troll. I do use open source software from time to time, and while I find this idea noble and "possibly" beneficial for the longterm. I do worry about central governments making those kinds of decisions for its employees.
Fucking druggies. They get what they deserve.
Are you advocating the death of our beloved President?!
You terrorist!
the last time i checked Redhat is an American company too, you ignorent fuckwad...
An IT industry covers quite a spectrum of jobs. There are your lower-level technicians and support staff. There are higher-level system and network administrators. There are system architects who identify organization's need and designs an appropriate sytem from available components (or identies components needed). There are programmers who build those additional components.
The only time any of these jobs require Microsoft is when the organization has already invested in Microsoft solutions. And even then - change will happen whether Microsoft is used or not (witness the slow deprecation of many long-standing Novell networks and the migration from one version of Windows to another).
If the Government of Peru invests heavily in a Linux or *BSD infrastructure, it will still have to hire a whole gambit of IT workers to support its environment. If the 15k job figure is correct then it will be 15k IT professionals with a background in Open Source systems and software.
MS isn't the first US corp to complain about "unfair" trading terms imposed by foreign governments. Take the beef row with Europe. Europe maintains that any US concern can ship beef to Europe, providing it meets European standards - basically that the level of growth hormone in the meat is below a certain level. So this is free trade, anyone can produce goods to the spec. The problem is that in the US nobody produces beef without growth hormones. So no beef goes from the US to Europe.
Similarly, MS could produce "open" software for use in Peru in order to compete in the free market according to local regulations. That would mean a big shift in its own practices which it is not prepared to make. I have some sympathy for the MS position. Remember the bit in Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy where Arthur Dent is told he had free access to the plans to demolish the Earth to make way for a hyperspace bypass. That is, if he can get to Alpha Centauri, get into the basement of the planning office, break open a locked safe etc.
But I'm still not eating American beef.
IIRC Peru cited two other reasons for specifying open source software besides money. There is a real fear that closed file formats might prevent recovery of information. There is also the possibility of back doors. If there are any it is far more likely that the US has access to them than the Peruvian government. Don't get me wrong, money is a real issue but common defense is the first order of the state. Machiavelli was right.
All your database are belong to U.S.
So is IBM. Why is Microsoft's position being singled out for support by the US public's representive in Peru?
Requiring software to come with modifiable source code does not discriminate against any company. It should just be considered part of the specification that is desired from the software. Since pretty much all software has source code, it is only a business decision (like pricing, the color of the box, bundling, etc.) whether or not to release the source code with the binary code. As far as specs go, it is pretty easy to comply with. Easier than making a Spanish language set of documentation.
I am amazed by the audacity of trying to dictate the specs that another country's agencies want to use in a call for software. If companies don't want to bid on it, they are free to hawk their wares elsewhere.
What is next, opposition to countries that want documentation in their own peoples' languages instead of the Industry Standard (TM) American English?!?
For some odd reason a submission that I'd relayed last night hasn't been fit to grace the pages of Slashdot. So much for journalistic integrity.
2 07 26hnsunlinux.xml
I'll try this route:
Solaris x86 is alive. Read more here.
http://infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/07/26/0
Holy shit if I had moderation karma right now.... MOD THIS UP.
"And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
What does the "free market" have to do with this? The proposed legislation addresses the nature of software to be used by the government, doesn't it? Whatever software they choose, it's chosen by the government.
So if the Peruvian government chooses software that is produced by a company that makes big donations to Hamilton's party, that's the free market, but if the government chooses software made by somebody else, that's government intervention? Is that Hamilton's position?
..how having a requirement that you will only use open source programs is shutting out Microsoft any more than a requirement that the software have some feature X (say the ability to properly handle right-to-left writing) is shutting out Microsoft?
The legislation leaves the door entirely open for Microsoft to develop open source applications and sell it to the Peruvian government. Should Microsoft choose not to bid in that field, is that the Peruvian government's fault? In fact, they are letting market forces decide and it is the American Ambassador who is getting in the way of that.
In fact, if anything, this is the embodiment of the capitalist mentality. Entity A desires a product with various features. If entity B does not or can not supply those features, they do not get the business, and some entity that can does, and more power to that other entity.
Part of the Peruvian government's desired feature list (if the legislation goes through)is a product that they can inspect, modify, and alter themselves. The Ambassador is saying "Please change your requirements so we can compete" without giving any reason to do so other than without the change, they won't (not can't)compete.
That Jesus Christ guy is getting some terrible lag... it took him 3 days to respawn! -NJ CoolBreeze
Ambassador Hamilton says
...
while the U.S. is not opposed to the development of Open Source software, it prefers to support a free market where the quality of the product can determine the issue.
The overall "quality" of the product can only be measured in terms of how well it suits the user's needs. Villanueva outlined several needs which can only be addressed by Open Source software.
Hamilton should encourage MS to participate in the free market and offer the customer the particular quality they are asking for, namely openness. MS is free to ask whatever they feel is a fair price. Peru is free to tell them to
Comment removed based on user account deletion
No one will ever end U.S. military and cultural "imperialism." Why don't you do everyone a favor and do something USEFUL with your life, or kill yourself and stop wasting our air. That is all.
We give them some micro$oft and they give us some cocaine!
Oh... Yes... I already see how Oracle, IBM (DB2) or Apple (OS X) opens their sources to enter to that government bid. You guys are simply short minded, as soon as you hear Micro$oft your judgment evaporates without any attempts to think for a one step ahead. Do you really think Peru would enforce copyright law there to prevent "free" distribution of those companies' work?
ah all the companies you have mentioned also ship linux and unix systems..
Fact Two while Ms proclaims that open source is a virus or evil they through their coding improvements of the opne source system at Hotmail actually contribute code back to such projects as gcc...
Ms cannot have it both ways..if its wants peru's money it has to prove theirs is a better system both on performance, security and total cost..an arguement they know they cannot win thus the attempt at buying their way into Peru through the Ambassodor..
Its time to take Ms down for the count.. since the states or doj are afraid to do why not us the consumers and users..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
..home from the local pub and checked out what's new on Slashdot: "MICROSOFT'S BIG DICK IN PERU!" - that's what I read the first time ;)
Polotics is pushing water up hill
While charging your Neigbour the bill
While you drink from your Still
With the water you pushed up the hill
At one time M$ seriously threatened (& planned- from reliable sources) to move out of the USA when the anti-trust pressure got to them.
Think it's hard for a software corp. to move?
Think M$ has nationalistic B.S to worry about? Wake Up.
If you work in the IT field and carry archaic nationalistic baggage you're doomed in every sense of the word. And any corporation that does is finished right off the bat.
They just cannot compete in a global world.
So wake up and polish your skills to compete at a global level.
Govt. protectionism hurts in the long run.
If MS gets into the habit of heavy lobbing ( like in Germany) or even bribing goverments like seems to be happening in Peru and other countries is one thing. This is usual.
But if the U.S.A goverment starts threatening other goverments about the use of Microsoft products, it will be a completely different thing, and, in my mind, self defeating.
When his defense asked, "Which computer has Jon Johansen trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His own."
are they going to use MySQL where every sensible IT person would use Oracle or some other non-open DB ?
Functionality, price and opensource-ness should be a few of the things Peru considers when making a decision. Linux beats Windoz in all of these departments; there's really no need to require open sourceness.
IBM: 320,000 employees, $80 billion in annual sales, sells useful open source systems.
... the major strength of capitalism is diversity. Microsoft doesn't sell software that meets the needs of the government of Peru. If Microsoft would like to sell such software (open file formats + open source), that's fine. But if they continue to refrain from that, the whole point of a free market is that other companies can fill the customer's needs.
Microsoft: 48,000 employees, $28 billion in annual sales, sells crappy closed source software.
So, by your criterion of "big is good", IBM is 2 to 5 times as good as Microsoft.
Seriously
What's this "tax" you talk about? Please look up the definition of the word tax in a dictionary. I am free to buy a computer without any Microsoft software on it and thus pay no "tax". It's a usage fee placed on people who want to use software produced by that company. Doesn't sound unfair to me and it's certainly not a tax.
Calling it a tax is FUD on the same level as the RIAA trying to call people who listen to copyrighted music without paying for it "pirates".
Mmmm.. Donuts
I think the US pressuring Peru, saying that Peru will make more money (boost their economy) by not passing this bill, I can't help but be reminded about Janis Ian's comment:
n his June letter, Hamilton said that while the United States doesn't oppose the development of open-source software, it prefers to support a free market where the quality of the product can determine the issue.
He added that by excluding proprietary software companies like Microsoft, Peru would be hurting an industry that "has the potential to create 15,000" jobs in the local economy.
Well, what makes Hamilton (what an ironic name!) think that Peru has not made up it's mind about the quality of the software? I certianly have.
More, how is a GOVERNMENT spec for software purchases going to interfere with private purchases of software. What kind of "free market" is there in goverenment puchasing to begin with.
One more thing, who says that free software won't create jobs? It seems to me that free software has made more jobs here in the US than any single company ever will. Witness sendmail, Apatche, BSD, Linux, and others. What do Sun, Microsoft, HP, Compaq, IBM and other silly spellings have to compare to the thousands of jobs out there tending email, websites, company accounts and what not? Free software can do anything comercial software can and usualy does it better.
I'm disgraced. Our ambasador is meddling in an internal purchasing matter for reasons that don't make sense on their face for the sake of a few US companies. The decision is neither in the best intrests of the US as a whole nor even philisophicaly consistent. As Bill Gates goes in to buy government officials, our Government will be smeared with the corruption. Who will respect our wishes or opinions when we are so frivolous with them?
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Numerous US companies support open source, and if open source is widely adopted in Peru the Peruvians will certainly be able to contribute a lot to the codebase used by US companies.
So microsoft!=US in that case.
is make a deal with Peru to subsidize their licenses and show select Peruvian experts under strictly controlled terms, the source code. (after all they do this with large Customers.)
... well, like they normally do write scripts for everything and surf the web, (err enhance their knowledge).
This would meet most of "The Bill" requirements except the proprietary format and Price. Even those would satisfy many proponents of "The Bill".
This article sites the normal FUD that the Peruvian Bill prevents commercial Software from competing, loss of jobs like Tech support, dev., Sys. Admin....
Utter B.S! Everyone who has run Open Source knows how much Tech support odinary users would require.
Developers could be paid to customize OS software.
Sys. Admins could
Other Govts. should be worried b'se in the current climate who knows whether Ashcroft will collude with Bill and plant some tool in the software? It could happen with these guys.
There our those who say our former ambassador (Hamilton has, from I understand, been recently replaced) has an obligation to promote legitimate interests of the US government and industry.
However, it is very wrong for our government to promote the interests of any single American company or small group of companies against the interests of other American companies, and this is part of what Mr. Hamilton did so very wrong. Should the government similarly promote specific companies against their competitors in the marketplace here? If so this is neither capitalism nor a free market.
The fact is that many American companies could well have benefited from the proposed changes in Peruvian procurement law, and it is those interests, which must be held of equal value by a fair and impartial government, that Mr. Hamilton has betrayed.
Finally, what is our interest in Peru? Is it to promote the long term goals of helping a stanble civil democratic society to form, or is it to create a chatel state thru colonial economics? Surely if it is the former, assisting in the creation of a free and open software market in Peru must be our national interest and the free software bill the Peruvians had crafted meets this goal admirably well.
When I first heard about many of the recent actions of our previous Ambassador, I was deeply dissapointed. I hope his replacement is better able to serve the long term needs and interests of the American public, rather than the interests of a single corporate entity as his predeccesor had done.
David Sugar
Yah, and `over there' would rather it happened on US soil. Who has the most right to say where a war should happen, `them' or `us'?
Because they actually do. There are two main reasons for this:
Agree. However, bear in mind that armaments corporations are far from the biggest beneficiaries in a war.
Think about World War II, in which companies like Ford and Bayer made money from selling to both sides of the war at once. Except where things got out of hand and their facilities were destroyed*, oil companies, steel companies, banks and many others all showed that in one way or another they thought of the war as a Godsend. Many Swiss banks, for example, did a roaring trade even in what were to all appearances financially destitute circumstances.
Consequentially, what you're basically looking for are two things:
* Krupp's factories, for example, seemed suspiciously immune to Allied bombing.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
By this logic, does this not mean that other countries must NOT use MS products? After all, these countries will be letting their vital systems run on software will be known only to Americans!
All your favorite sites in one place!
Free Linux CD still could use a Peru affiliate. Interested parties should contact the maintainer on said page.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
You wonder why the third world hates you? You wonder why a bunch of crazy arabs fly planes into your buildings? Because your government tries to force pepsi cola down the throats of the world and Microsoft onto the desktops of a country which is so poor that windowsXP costs several months salary if most of the people had jobs which they don't.
I hope your righteous government doesn't try that shit here in Europe, because then then your righteous corrupt president can go fuck himself along with Bill gates and company.
>> Green Party
> Libertarians
And when you combine both those parties and throw in a little , you get the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party.
Will I retire or break 10K?
As much as it pains me to say it, I'm somewhat in favor of Microsofts position.
Look, what effect will Dr. Villanueva's bill have?
Perhaps, as all good *nix zealots know, open source really is a lot better. In that case, I'm sure the Peruvian goverment, populated as it is by honest, intelligent politicians will choose open source. Dr. Villanueva's bill will have no effect.
On the other hand...what if, unlikely though it may be, Peru might actually benefit in some small way from purchasing Microsft products? I can hear your laughter now, but what if they'd be better off with MS software? Well, in that case, Dr. Villanueva's bill would force them to make a bad choice.
Forcing people or goverments to do whats best for them is not generally a good long term strategy. Perhaps we (and Dr. Villanueva) really do know what's best for Peru, but forcing them to make the "right choice" seems a bit condescending. "Don't worry about this high technology stuff - you're just a small unimportant backwater, and obviously don't know what you're doing. Listen to us and everything will be fine."
Of course, if what we're really concerned about is that the politicians don't know how to weigh the pros and cons of the sitation - say so! Why not write them and explain? Get your friends to write them. Run a contest to find convincing arguments. Or maybe you're concered the politicians might accept bribes (in one form of another) from MS? In that case, maybe Dr. Villanueva should introduce some anti-bribary legislature. But the only way his current bill can help is if open source really is better, but the Peruvian goverment is too stupid, clueless, and/or corrupt to see and agree. If any or all of those is the case, I don't think the bill is the correct answer.
This is going to give the poor oppressed buggers who think that armed revolution is the answer one more reason to gun him down in the street when they get the chance.
Although I hate violence, I think I wouldn't weep to see someone get their revenge on him or fat man.
Besides which, the US is only concerned with a "free market" (however the US wishes to conceive of this phrase) within its own borders. As has been pointed out in this discussion in several places already, the US doesn't care what its companies do outside its own borders: break the law, exploit resources and people, f*ck up the environment: as long as it ain't ours...
Pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will! - Antonio Gramsci.
You revisionist conspiracy nuts make me sick. Maybe his factories were not bombed because of the space aliens and their black helicopter technology, yes? Or that the Declaration of Independence was really written by a black woman named Oprah. I mean, seriously, just kill yourself.
I hope that Peru sees that the US is full of S##T and thier politicians are bought and paid for.
Sorry if it is redundant.
Atto
I didn't use the preview button, so get over it!!!!
Mike
If Peru mandates the use of open source software, this affects all commercial software companies, not just Microsoft. The fact that Microsoft is the one spearheading this doesn't mean much; you'd expect the industry leader (put down your flame-throwers: I mean leader in the business sense, not in the "who we should follow" sense) you'd expect them to be spearheading it. In this case, Microsoft is fighting for (in addition to their own bottom-line) the principles espoused by open source: freedom of choice. You should be able to choose whatever software you want - you'd shouldn't be limited in any way.
The best thing about a boolean is even if you are wrong, you are only off by a bit.
Uh-ho, another excuse for the Americans to meddle in South American affairs. First it's drugs and now it's Open Source. Ho hum...
http://saveie6.com/
Now, I know this is /. so fairness and equal rights for all is out the door but.. I just had to write.
If someone was passing a law that ONLY allowed MS software in a government you guys would be up in arms! But here is a government passing a law that only allows open source software. They are actual mandating at the government level what type of software can be bought!
So, does this mean if congress tries to pass a law that says: "Only Windows allowed" - will everyone say, "oh, ok, fair is fair?" - - no of course not! They will say, ahha MS bought out congress and this is illegal and it's a monopoly and this would be listed under YRO!
Look - Let the market decide which software fits the bill best. Shouldn't the computer admins decide? Politicans should never decide what type of software to use - does that make sense to anyone? Please just remove the fact that "MS" is involved and imagine this was Puru saying, "Um, ok, you can ONLY run distribution X and distribution Y is illegal" or say they said: "Absolutely no IBM hardware or software, ONLY Mac."
This hipocracy should stop -- and anyone modding this a troll is contributing exactly to what I mean. Anyone who doesn't toe the "linux is everything, anything else is shit" line is a troll? Please don't be childish.
http://saveie6.com/
The argument about the jobs is really so ridiculous that becomes funny:
;)), and thanks to that, the company is expanding and generating even more jobs, profits and taxes.
It would be like advocating to stop using trucks and any kind of machinery in agriculture and use horses and human power instead, that would create thousands, if not millions of jobs!
<sarcasm>So, lets give up the industrial revolution and go back to the middle ages so we can create thousands of jobs!
Let's stop using electricity, cars, planes, and computers all together! they all save jobs!</sarcasm> *sigh*
Open source is a kind of revolution in the IT industry, of course many people will lose their jobs as consequence of it, but many more jobs will be created thanks to it, and many companies will improve how they work allowing them to expand and generate more jobs. Any new tool that helps companies get their jobs done with a minimum cost is good for the economy.
Another of my favorite MS FUD is that the taxes for software are a good thing for the economy, oh well, so then is bad that companies save money? Lets duplicate taxes on software then! It will be even better! This also assumes that the money don't spent in MS software disappears in a black hole, I'm sorry, but it will be spent in more productive ways that will actually help the economy(and generate taxes) instead of just help MS economy.
Disclaimer: I work for a non IT company as software developer and system administrator using only Open/Free Source software, the company is doing quite well, thanks to the use of OSS, among other things(like having a smart boss, hi Carl!
\\Uriel
"When in doubt, use brute force." Ken Thompson
resellers and certified beanie wearers that
make up the typical Microsoft infrastructure.
It's just standard MLM (multi level marketing),
like tupperware and herbalife.
It's a big gravy train.
In the case of Peru, open software and public file formats are REQUIREMENTS. Nobody is keeping Microsoft out. If Microsoft wants to compete in Peru's market then they have to meet their requirements.
Government systems commonly require candidate system components to have a second source - multiple suppliers. This kind of thing is done all the time on US Government contracts. If a particular single-sourced processor is chosen for a critical weapons system, for example, and after the system is deployed, the vendor goes out of business, what do we do?
Peru has every right to require open source and public file formats. If Microsoft wants to get into markets where this is a requirement then they should make that commitment.
Your post seems to imply that Peru no right to establish these requirements. How childish is that?
I want to be alone with the sandwich
I am also confused with the spelling...
--
ACid
It's common practice; if somebody on a big entity (a company, organization, government, etc) wants something, he writes the requirements so specific that rules out any other option.
So, if a paper says "i want something with this and that properties", it's easy to read "i want THAT and no other"
I would love if such a law could be passed, but it's not the ideal one. For me the ideal one would ask only for open format documents.
M$ would have no defense against such a requirement, and it would let any locally developed software to cleanly integrate with wathever is bought, even if it was from M$
-Kz-
Let's stop being stupid! They say this bill is unconstitutional, because it excludes some companies. These companies are not excluded, they simply don't have the desired product to sell. In this case, open source software. That's the product the peruvian govt wants.
If I want to eat a hotdog, would McDonald's say I'm excluding them, just because they don't sell hotdogs?
Screw you Micro$hit!
...and Bush is not only letting them off... but he is promoting them. Bush sees political contributions for helping this criminal company at the expense of lawful ones. Crony Capitalism at its worst.
I want to be alone with the sandwich
Keep out the foreign influence??
Linux invasion into Peru might be the precursor into a hostile Finnish takeover...
...and you'll see that this idea is not from the tinfoil hat brigade. And if you can't be bothered even looking, many will be asking, why did you bother to post?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Tired of the DMCA and other possible moves of American Corporatism?
;-)
Are you skilled and experienced in OpenSource/FreeSoftware development?
Then contact your local Peruvian embassy and let them know of your skills and talent and that you would love to live and work in Peru if they mandate opensource.
Why live in a country in which the government ridicules your ideals? Just imagine if all the US's OSS/FS developers and companies moved to Peru. Pretty funny really
I've experiments to run, there is research to be done on the people who are still alive.
More money for our country = good
Less money for our country = bad
Our ambassador promoting our country making more money = good
Our ambassador standing by while Peru passes a law that exludes one of the largest companies in America = bad
This is of course in reference to our country, not to Peru's.
It's really quite a bit simpler than that.
It requires a certain number of jobs to run a certain amount of software. The number of jobs may vary quite a bit depending on the quality of software but there's nothing inherent in open source or proprietariness that causes software to be good or bad. We all have our opinions on this matter; let's stick to the basic assumption that the quality of the software packages is the same for both.
Peru requires a certain amount of software; it can get that software from a proprietary source or from a, well, an open source. They will still have the same amount of software when they're through, hence, the same number of jobs.
In fact, since open source tends to cost less than proprietary software (this is not a secret after all) there will be more money in the budget. It stands to reason that open source will create more jobs on average with that budget surplus.
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
Unless those 15,000 jobs are kickback jobs that is: "Buy the software of my largest contributor errr I mean constituency and we'll farm out some development jobs to your country."
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
Angry is one thing theolein, but what you just posted is sickening, naked hatred. I do *not* understand how in, what is supposed to be a somewhat civil forum, your post which states you'd favor the murder of a human being dispite your distaste for violence actually got favorable moderation.
Complain politely but in quantity, ideally get Redhat and IBM to complain as well that Microsoft is seeking to exclude other american companies.
The ambassador is not a shill for Microsoft, he probably knows nothing of the business. He does try to represent US interests, but he needs to be told that there is a world outside Microsoft.
See my journal, I write things there
Point one, we have a Republican in the Oval Office. The Republican party has traditionally supported "Big Business".
Point two. Domestic issues are irrevalant. The anti-trust lawsuit has to do with Microsoft doing business in Peru, not Microsoft doing business in the US. If Peru wants to create laws restricting Microsoft, or anyother US corporation from what either the US Govt. or Corp. considers fair trade, the US Government is more than willing to hold an economic gun to that Government.
If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
Before you go spouting, Id make sure I learn to differentiate between the European Union and Europe.
Microsoft has already 'bought' into the Balkans and eastern Europe and making inroads with governments in 'bigger' european countries.
We subcontract a lot in these countries and from all accounts, their papers all ran these stories
about how their politicians are taking monies
and allow Microsoft exclusivity when a cheaper, safer, more stable and easily adaptable solution already exists.
Only difference between the 'democrats' who now run these countries and the old socialist bureaucracy is that the money goes through less hands now.
As for the wouldnt dare part...please,
there are only a few countries that would actually think of crossing the US and one (UK) has a leader who is Shrub junior's little poodle
(check out the new George Michael video), another 4th Reich) which thanks to the US has been allowed to be a world military player again and one (France) which the americans couldnt care less
what they think.
The other countries are even more meaningless.
I agree with your position but I think you are way off base when it comes to teh courage of the European countries.
z.
Cant you understand sarcasm/puns when you see it? He was purposely spelling it that way I bet
The article doesn't explicitly say anything about the ambassador singling out Microsoft - the article says "proprietary companies like Microsoft" or something like that. That means the article interprets it as such (and maybe Peru does).
You don't know what the letter says, and asking for the country to utilize US software (almost all the commercial software is closed-source) is well within what an ambassador may ask.
Grow up, nerds, and quit being such single minded funamentalist goons.
You're arguing inane, completely irrelevent arguments on many fronts.
1.) The ambassador didn't single out and say "buy Microsoft". He said Buy American. The article _infers_ Microsoft because they're the biggest company. I'll bet you filthy nerds a shower that the letter doesn't specifically mention Microsoft.
2.) Nobody's dictating anything. They're lobbying, trying to persuade, etc... That's what ambassador's do. You don't think foreign ambassadors lobby for their businesses in the US?
Grow up, people, find a real cause.
You lost all credibility when you compared PostgreSQL to Oracl or MSSQL. You really should avoid drawing attention to yourself by spouting off in areas you are obviously clueless in.
Yeah, they're a force to be reckoned with. Wouldn't want to get the Germans or the French mad at us. Oooooh no, I think the Germans are getting mad. Ooooh dear. The French may get angry and boycott Jerry Lewis telethons.
Seriously though, you think the problems the third world has with the US is commercialization? It's politics, and unilateralism. We pick a side, and we stay on it even when they're almost as bad as the other side. But at least we pick the strong side.
Nobody gives a shit about Pepsi or Microsoft except crusading nerds. The 60's had the free-love hippies, and the 90's-00's have the free
software hippies. I don't know which of you stinks worse.
You are clearly some kind of communist. Have you, like, missed the last 90 years of history? It doesn't work.
And you don't hate violence - communists _love_ violence. It's the great equalizer in your crusade against nature.
Advocating violence because of your simpleminded little communist agenda is pretty out there, considering we're talking about a businessman here.
What a great idea! And maybe you should include help from your staunchest allies, the NATO, because an attack on M$ equals an attack on the US, and an attack on any NATO member is an attack on all!
Yes, showing your power like this is sure to win you many new friends (who will likely want to travel to your great country in planes that they can conveniently land in/near buildings).
Don't you never think *why* the citizens of certain countries want to kill americans? Do you believe it is some random act of God, or might it just be there is some cause?
You are saying that it is difficult for M$ to compete under those circumstances.
Possibly they *should* create those 15000 jobs in Peru, in order to create an open source version of Windows?
After reading that page in the message I'm replying to, it came to me that the whole political scene is seriously hosed, as in Animal Farm type of way. Has Nader refuted those claims? Maybe they're true!
Well, luckily I'm not from the US, as I wouldn't vote anyone...
I think the entire idea of a voted representative should be trashed worldwide (yes, in my country we vote some pig farmer to the parliament and then they can fuck things up by pressing the button the party tells them to) and real democracy (the people make the decisions) installed. The concept of two parties in power seems hilarious. The two party system looks like the political system of the old Soviet Union, except the Communist party is divided in two and has different names for the two branches!
As a reader of slashdot and a software engineer, all I can say is that in almost every situation that has ever occured in computing in the past few years, is that anything that Microsoft does is just wrong.
Many free software people say that Microsift is really not that bad and they are just proprietary software compay who does what any other proprietary software company would do. That's wrong. Thay are 2227778/bad. They are evil as us stubborn knowledge hoarders; advocaters make them out to be.
They do more damage to our society they they do good. I would gladly take a pay cut if given the opportunity that take customers away from Microsoft.
I would feel more comfrotable living with no Microsoft presence in my life than I a a as user of any new windows, including the smaller additions.
open source really is a lot better. In that case, I'm sure the Peruvian goverment, populated as it is by honest, intelligent politicians will choose open source
Are you saying that any country who is choosing M$ has dishonest, stupid politicians?
It sure would explain a few things...
With all due respect to some of the past posters, our economy has hardly collapsed. The stock market has taken a beating of late but- despite popular misconception- Wall Street and The Economy are not exactly one in the same. This is a glitch compared to a serious depression and we are still the richest country in the world by magnitudes. Also, the government mandating anything is usually a bad idea. You want to talk about lack of competition, lets talk about the Big Government being bound by law to use one competitor. If apple or microsoft or anyone else can supply a better or more relevant product, do you really want to deny your government the ability to pursue that option? Im not saything they can, just that making it law is as anti-competetive as you can possibly get.
is the best president that could be bought between Enron and MS.
One of the great virtues of Open Source, Linux, Unix, GNU, etc., is that they encourage intellectual development. That is an especially important issue for developing countries. If the IT in a developing country consists only of magic boxes that perform some limited but useful functions, but otherwise represent yet another driver of trade deficit and debt, then the critical need for building local skills is thwarted.
There are also valid issues of national pride. A country that successfully nurtures its local IT industry can, in at least one area, thumb it's nose at the U.S.A. empire without getting bombed into oblivion.
----------
Manifesto for the Peoples of the Third Millennium
This clearly shows that the US does not really care about the freedom of the people of Peru. All you guys care about is money.
Did you really punish Microsoft for being a monopoly ?? Don't give me that software donation bullshits. You have no balls to do anything to hurt Microsoft because that corporation dictates everything in your market economy.
Microsoft owns you.
Who cares about freedom right ?
=Spike=
You wonder why the third world hates you? You wonder why a bunch of crazy arabs fly planes into your buildings?
Not really; the king of the hill always gets hated and envied. Our media pundits and Ivy League-ers may wonder why; I don't. I learned why on the fscking playground.
Anyway, only a small violent subset actually hates us, the rest is trying to (genuinely) move here.
Because your government tries to force pepsi cola down the throats of the world and Microsoft onto the desktops of a country which is so poor that windowsXP costs several months salary if most of the people had jobs which they don't.
Um, do you have video of someone forcibly pouring Pepsi down someone's throat? I've travelled to many third world countries, and I saw people just buying it because they wanted it (including me). Sometimes they bought it because they knew it had clean drinkable water.
I hope your righteous government doesn't try that shit here in Europe, because then then your righteous corrupt president can go fuck himself along with Bill gates and company.
You sound kinda hysterical. If you don't want to use Windows, don't. Go use a nice Euro-made OS ... oh wait, Linus moved here too, didn't he? Well, make your own. We don't care. ;) Gates does, I'm sure, for his business, but the bulk of us here really don't sit around pining for your good opinion of us. Again, our pundits and academics may, but the rest of us don't.
Its USA meddling (for example, CIA coups against popular govts in Iran 'n Iran back in the 50's & finally creating a country for a bunch of foreigners, European Jews, in the middle of the Middle East) that led directly to the WTC attack.
Afterall does Switzerland worry about such things as WTC, attacks? No because the Arab Street doesn't give a fuck either way about Switzerland, & why is that? Because Switzerland doesn't meddle in their affairs.
For the hundreth time, the US only creats problems for itself by meddling in the affairs of every other continent (look at Pearl Harbour).
Its ironic Americans go on about the potential problem of Chinese agression, but has China ever shown any inclination to meddle outside of Asia.
Gez the US could halVE their defence budget overnight if they simply just kept their meddling to North America. Afterall if the US kept all their troops/military facilities at home, the only countries that could ever attack the US would be Mexico & Canada & I don't see that happening.
The fact is that US meddling is what turned the Arab street against the US, just as it turned Japan against the US.
Get the H1B scum out of america now!
The H1B scum at your former job probably lied on the resume. Most H1B scum are happy to lie, because they know that nobody can ever confirm some crap degree from a school in India.
I strongly recommend you should use my babysitter, who comes from my housing development. My housing development is very good. [I wouldn't want to mention that my babysitter is currently under investigation for child abuse as it may make my housing development look bad]
"...putting pressure on India for an Enron power plant [consortiumnews.com]."
You didn't mention the pipeline through Afghanistan that would have been necessary to make that power plant economical!!!
As I see it, only part of the economy is collapsing, the top end.
The rot seems to exist mainly in the Fortune 500 companies, who have been cooking their books to make it look like $100+ billion gaints can still appear to be growth stocks even if it just isn't possible; "You can't beat the market, if you are the market.".
The real danger comes when the rot spreads down to the many small and medium size companies that are still thriving.
Unfortunately, in "Dubya Boy", you have a president who sees "the economy" as being made up of Enron, WorldCom, J.P. Morgan, Tyco, Microsoft, CISCO etc. Think of how threatening this mess must be appearing to him!
Imagine if a car dealer refused to show you anything but the outside of the car and the driver's seat. And you were forbidden to open the hood and look at the engine unless you took to the car to a licensed mechanic.
In my universe I'm perfectly normal, it's not my fault you don't live in my universe.
\\Uriel said: "Another of my favorite MS FUD is that the taxes for software are a good thing for the economy,"
Microsoft must not study basic economics. Taxes are, by their very nature, regressive. They are not good for the economy because that is money that you and I (and our companies) cannot spend. Instead the government has it and uses it for non-productive things, like hiring people to make sure we pay our taxes.
In my universe I'm perfectly normal, it's not my fault you don't live in my universe.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
KDE was cooked up in the same country that started both World Wars, embraced philosophies of destruction and hate (such as Nazism and Fascism), and spawned evil murderous maniacs such as Adolf Hitler.
By using Kde you are implicitly endorsing these hatemongering people and their genocidal dogmas.
A true patriot uses GNOME, written in the land of the free and the home of the brave. By using Gnome you are re-affirming your American ideals and supporting the open doctrine of truth, liberty, and love.
On the one hand, sure, our diplomats have a national goal of promoting U.S. enterprise, but do we have to promote companies which we are simultaneously pursuing in court for numerous violations of our laws? Isn't that a bit counter-productive?
Typical 'guilty until proven innocent' because you don't like them mentality.
Until this MS/DOJ court case is finally settled, they are not guilty. This means they are able to utilize the same governmental resources as any other US based corporation in international commerce.
I am sure many countries would welcome you as a citizen since you agree with the 'guilty until proven innocent' judical system
Feel free to leave anytime.
Exactly!! Success is failing quickly. (I think that might even be a quote from Gates)
There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
Funny thing is Allende's Doctor was the first one there after he died, and has repeatadly stated that Allende commited suicide.
So it has been often claimed, by many right-wing apologists for Pinochet. The truth is somewhat more complicated.
Please mod parent up!
No really, I am curious. To lose credibility merely by *comparing* PostgreSQL to Oracle or MS SQL? Hmm. Seems to me the original juxtaposition between MySQL and Oracle was purposefully intended to be a straw man - clearly MySQL is much less full-featured and aimed at a totally different set of applications.
OK, though. I'm sure you are not a troll but genuinely advocate the use of Oracle or MS SQL for all databases even in the low-mid range where PostgreSQL is (as far I have been able to tell) perfectly adequate. If so, the extra license money must be buying something truly wonderful. Care to share what that might be?
I'm not an expert, but since this is an area in which you are not 'clueless', perhaps you can explain.
-- What do you need?
-- Gnus. Lots of Gnus.
Educate him that there is a lot of money to be made from open source software.
Name the company that's making it.
Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
So what you are saing is that it is OK for a goverment to decide to remain hostage to the needs of a foreign company when it comes to computing goods?
What you are saying is that if one day the Peruvian goverment can't pay its dues, it is OK that they can't have access to modern software unless they make a migration to free software to use closed applications?
What you are saying is that it is OK for a goverment to store sensitive data in propietary formats that change according to the whims of a foreign company bound by the laws of a foreign ountry that if angry, would not hesitate to embargo them?
Heck, the more I think about it, the more I think goverments should not rely on closed software, or at least should not use closed formats to store their data.
I hope Peru sees the light in spite of the obscene amount of sping that MS is applying to this matter (saying they donate this much US$, which in case it comes in the form of MS products, is a donation of far less money with strings attached, unless they donated also support and license renewals for a sizeable time in the future).
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
IBM had lots of money before Linux entered the picture, and they could drop it now without seeing a blip on thier revenue stream. Get some hard numbers on how many Open Source programmers IBM has put to work or come up with a different company.
Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
Don't think the rest of the world needs Microsoft.
The following quote is from: http://www.opensource.org/docs/msFUD_to_peru.php "Research by the Gartner Group (an important investigator of the technological market recognized at world level) has shown that the cost of purchase of software (operating system and applications) is only 8% of the total cost which firms and institutions take on for a rational and truely beneficial use of the technology. The other 92% consists of: installation costs, enabling, support, maintenance, administration, and down-time." End Quote So, does this mean that since Open Source Software costs $0, that 8% is 0, so it must be 8% of $0 total, because of the fact that the 8% is nothing, so must everything else...Hmmm...OSS COI is really cheap I guess...lol...
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.