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?
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.
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.
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.
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.