Slashdot Mirror


Israel v. Microsoft, Next Round

hodet writes "From Haaretz.com, in predictable fashion, looks like a little tough bargaining with Microsoft is all that is needed to get your way. As many predicted after this story, looks like all you have to do is threaten to move to an OSS alternative to make them relent. Maybe it's time to stop getting excited about every little announcement that comes out." The upshot of the story is that Microsoft is willing to split the components of Office in order to sell it to the Israeli government's Finance Ministry. Reader blunte, though, links to a story that discounts the importance of MS's move: "Israel re-iterates: No More MS Software. This is round two. MS has made an effort to reconcile with Israel, and Israel still says No. Israel govt's purchases account for 3-4% of MS Israel's annual revenue."

464 comments

  1. hate to say by mekkab · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Hate to say I told you so!

    Yes, it IS hard being right all the time.
    To do: short sell SCO...

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
    1. Re:hate to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, you're proud of your amazing ability to state the blatantly obvious? Well, uh, WAY TO GO LITTLE GUY!

      By the way, what color will fresh snow be next month?

  2. I wonder if... by Jarwulf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Other governments will see this as an opportunity to step up efforts against Microsoft. What were Israel's specific complaints against MS? Most government customers seem to be comfortable with their relationship as is...

    1. Re:I wonder if... by Detritus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Israel is in the middle of a severe budget crunch. That's encouraging the government to look for ways to cut costs.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    2. Re:I wonder if... by commodoresloat · · Score: 5, Funny
      What were Israel's specific complaints against MS?

      Israeli policy is never to negotiate with terrorists.

    3. Re:I wonder if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know at my corperation there is a lot of internal bitching about the cost of Microsoft software; it does not get reported to the press because we like to pretend we know whats going on to the general public.

      I'm sure there are many others in the same spot.

    4. Re:I wonder if... by primus_sucks · · Score: 1

      The government of Israel pays tens of millions of shekels every year to Microsoft.

      That was one complaint from the article since you're too lazy to read it:) Maybe it also has something to do with running your government with insecure, closed source software that someone could easily slip some spyware into.

    5. Re:I wonder if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      'Funny', huh? There's more truth in this than you may have realized when you wrote it.


      (And (OT), Israel may not negotiate with terrorists, they sure reward them all the time. Or what would would you call a repeated promise to the extremists on the other side that all it takes to stop Israel from talking peace, is to blow yourself up on a busy market place? The practical effect is that of a Nobel prize for terrorism... for some no doubt even the intended effect.)

    6. Re:I wonder if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israeli policy is never to negotiate with terrorists.

      Israeli policy is never to negotiate, period.

    7. Re:I wonder if... by stesch · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Israel is in the middle of a severe budget crunch. That's encouraging the government to look for ways to cut costs.

      Peace would be a start.

    8. Re:I wonder if... by adam613 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, the US's poilicy is never to negotiate with terrorists. In Israel it's the other way around; the terrorists' policy is never to negotiate with Israel.

    9. Re:I wonder if... by bluGill · · Score: 1

      Yeah, peace would help a lot. However it can't be achived other than in fairy tails. There is too much hate on the other side (some deserved, some not) for it to happen. Israel needs to deal with the world they live in, not some ideal world, peace isn't an option, though they do try. (we can debate if they are doing the right things. In the end we can never know what would happen if the alternatives were followed.)

      Unless you seriously want to pay the price to move everyone in Israel to a different part of the world, and think you can make the people in that part happy about it. Then make the people of Isreal happy. Just because you can find a big enough area of Northern Canada with no residents doesn't means that anyone would want to move from the climate of Israel to there.

    10. Re:I wonder if... by bugg · · Score: 0, Troll

      though they do try.

      Do they?

      When Syria starts making moves towards peace negotiations, Israeli officials start talking about plans to expand civilian settlement in the occupied Golan Heights (Syrian territory, or if you'd like to get ultra-technical, part of it is Lebanese territory). Many agree that it's in violation of Article 49 of the Geneva Convention for a government to encourage civilians to move into an occupied territory, especially for the purpose of changing demographics (what Article 49 was designed to prevent).

      While Iraq has been neutralized as a threat and Iran and Libya have taken steps towards WMD disclosure and disarmanment, Israel prepares to take steps to bar Vanunu from leaving the country upon his release, and rebuffs any suggestion that Israel should consider disarming as well.

      When Palestinians suggest a two-state solution along 1967 lines if the late 70s, and this idea gains international recognition and acceptance, Israel invades Palestinian refugee camps and other areas that Palestnians were living in in Lebanon in the 1980s. There were no cross-border attacks leading up to the war, despite what some may try to tell you today, with the best provocation being an Israeli army jeep that hit a land mine in Lebanon; where the Israeli army had no legal business driving. In the war, Israel killed tens of thousands of Palestinian and Lebanese civilians and set the Palestinians back decades from having any sort of united leadership.

      In the 1990s, Yitzhak Rabin started the Oslo process, but reassured his constitutents that it would not lead to a Palestinian state- despite the fact that Israel led the Palestinians (and the world) to believe otherwise. The number of Israeli settlers in the West Bank and Gaza doubled in the Oslo years. Netanyahu ran, and won, on a campaign to foil the Oslo accords by doing only the bare minimum required to avoid international scrutinty and doing everything Israel could to undo the rest.

      And 120,000 Israelis protested today against any sort of withdrawl from the settlements. take a look or just check out the crowd.

      If that's trying to create peace, I'd hate to see Israel attempt to create war.

      --
      -bugg
    11. Re:I wonder if... by bluGill · · Score: 1

      They don't always try the way you would like to see it, and most would argue that it isn't the best way. If you don't trust the eneimy to provide peace, then only preemptive war can provide peace (by bringing the war to them instead of them bring it to you).

      There is plenty of blame to go around. Nobody (or at least not enough people) on either side is really willing to bring about peace for it to happen.

    12. Re:I wonder if... by HiggsBison · · Score: 1

      Hey, now! Let's not go bringing SCO Group into this!

      --
      My other car is a 1984 Nark Avenger.
    13. Re:I wonder if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To make peace, you need more than one side. To make war, you only need one. Do you seriously think Israel started a war as it was being born?

      Blaming Israel and the Jews for all the ills of the world makes you grow a stupid moustache. :)

      Even today, on NY Times, Hamas leader still believed that Palestinians should accept land for peace for the staging ground for the next offensive: driving the jews to the sea. Palestinian Authority has their work cut out if they really desire peace.

    14. Re:I wonder if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where is your complaint about Syria's occupation of Lebanon? Syria can publically make noises of trying to make peace, but as long as they support and arm Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations, it's just lips service, isn't it?

      Rabin had nothing to do with the settlements after Oslo. He was assasinated, remember? Oslo Accord also required PA to reign the terror groups, which they have not fully done to this day.

      As for 120,000 people protesting against settlement withdrawal, it's a non-issue if the rest of the population and the government agree to dismantle the settlements. A long time ago, more than 120,000 people in the US protested against giving blacks rights. Did the govenment of the US change the policy to appease them?

      Peace is a two way street. If I keep slapping your face, how long can you keep your peace? If your country is attacked by her neighbours over and over, are you going to sing Kumbaya or are you going to hit back? BOTH Israel and Palestine are to blame. BOTH must make concessions if they want peace. The world's failure to condemn suicide bombers only reinforces Israel's opinion that they must rely on themselves.

    15. Re:I wonder if... by superyooser · · Score: 2, Insightful
      When Palestinians suggest a two-state solution along 1967 lines if the late 70s, and this idea gains international recognition and acceptance

      The two-state solution was implemented a long time ago. All the land from the Mediterranean Sea through Transjordan comprises Palestine, and all of it was originally to be for the Jews. But Palestine was cut into two partitions: a small part for the Jews west of the Jordan River (presently Israel) and the rest of Palestine (presently Jordan) for the Arabs. (Never mind that the Arabs already had 21 countries and the Jews had none.)

      Now, is there to be a second two-state solution? Two Arab states in Palestine and only one Jewish state? What do the Arabs intend to do, keep chopping off a part of the Jewish homeland over and over until there's hardly room for a person to stand? Yes, that sounds like a final solution to me.

      And 120,000 Israelis protested today against any sort of withdrawl from the settlements. take a look or just check out the crowd.
      If that's trying to create peace, I'd hate to see Israel attempt to create war.

      How come when the leadership of Israel considers agreeing to ethnically cleanse half its land of Jews in accordance with the wishes of the Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, and Hizbullah, it's "creating peace," but when Jews live peaceably in their communities like any other decent folk, it's "making war"? The transfer of Jews is considered to be creating peace, but the transfer of terror-supporting Arabs (which is nearly all of them, according to polls) is considered to be making war.

      Israel already has peace with the Arabs who want peace - over a million in Israel. The PA Arabs don't want peace. They want the Middle East to be Judenrein. They hijacked the term "Palestinian" from the Jews and have been using it as as propagandist label to convince the world that they are the sole, rightful inhabitants. With 22 nations and 11,796,381 sq km of oil-rich land already under their authority (much of it vacant and unutilized!), the attempts at justifying this seemingly desperate campaign to acquire a trifling 20,770 sq km and 23rd state should fall on deaf ears. Is this piece of land really worth suicide? Of course not. But a Quranic command to slaughter Jews, achieve "martyrdom" by dying in the mission, and receive 72 virgins in Heaven is.

      Israel is not creating a war. There already is a war. It's called the Oslo War. The PLO broke every promise that it agreed to in the Oslo Accords. The PLO/PA has broken every promise it has ever made regarding peace agreements. That's why negotiations don't work when dealing with that thoroughly dishonest party. A chance to negotiate with them is not a chance for peace; it's a chance to play the fool again and suffer another barrage of vicious terrorist attacks until the next meaningless stage of the "peace process." It's another chance for Israel to open themselves up to the enemy and have their own people's blood running down the streets.

      There will not be peace until one side achieves military victory. I don't know what Israel is waiting for. They should tell the United Nazis to go to Hell (since that's where they're going anyway) and unilaterally drive out Dictator Arafat's neo-P'lishtim.

    16. Re:I wonder if... by bugg · · Score: 1

      The two-state solution was implemented a long time ago. All the land from the Mediterranean Sea through Transjordan comprises Palestine, and all of it was originally to be for the Jews.

      According to what? Britain, the recognized power in Mandate Palestine, never took any steps to endorse a Jewish State. Contrary to popular belief, the Balfour Declaration was specifically worded as to *not* mention statehood, and that's for one key reason: The British weren't Zionists.

      More importantly, *nothing* gave Israel the right to transfer non-Jews, either by scare tactics, or to deny the UNDHR Article 13 right to return to one's home. Not that I need to argue that the *Universal* Declaration of Human Rights has to be applied here, as it always applies, but this was recognized in everything from Balfour all the way through the UNSCOP recommendations- whenever they mentioned any sort of Zionist/Jewish entity in Palestine, they made it clear that nothing was to infringe upon the rights of the populous already there. Go read Balfour, if you don't believe me.

      How come when the leadership of Israel considers agreeing to ethnically cleanse half its land of Jews in accordance with the wishes of the Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, and Hizbullah, it's "creating peace," but when Jews live peaceably in their communities like any other decent folk, it's "making war"?

      Yeah, except it's not their communities. These "communities" have been ethnically cleansed of non-Jews, and use Israeli law to prevent not only non-Israelis from living there, but also non-Jews.

      Frankly, I'm not going to dignify your other propgandaized arguments with a response. I trust that slashdot readers will be smart enough to do a little research into your other points and realize your clearly racist arguments ("Black Africans have an entire contitnent, why do they need South Africa?") for what they are.

      --
      -bugg
    17. Re:I wonder if... by superyooser · · Score: 1
      whenever they mentioned any sort of Zionist/Jewish entity in Palestine, they made it clear that nothing was to infringe upon the rights of the populous already there.

      I agree. And the Zionist entity does in fact include a huge Arab population within its borders who have equal rights. There are eight Arabs in the Knesset, and I think there is one Arab judge in the Supreme Court. (How many Jews have positions in the PA?) I repeat: No one desires to transfer peaceful Arabs. Zionists want to transfer only the Arab populations that support terrorism., i.e. those living in PA-controlled areas.

      These "communities" have been ethnically cleansed of non-Jews,

      That's not true. After claims such as yours, Jews began taking photographs of the barren land before they built their houses to prove that nobody had lived there.

      and use Israeli law to prevent not only non-Israelis from living there, but also non-Jews.

      No, they're doing the exact opposite! Look at your own link from Ha'aretz. What do you think that whole rally was about? Sharon is threatening to throw Jews out of their homes and demolish whole communities. Construction in Judea, Samaria, and Aza has been completely halted for four months. Meanwhile, the Israeli government doesn't say a word about all the illegal Arab settlements.

  3. Ph34r by Tirinal · · Score: 1, Funny

    I always wondered what would happen when a government able to fall back on religion in an argument and Microsoft lawyer doublespeak would clash in an epic battle of obstinance.

    --
    ~Tirinal
  4. downturn for M$? by SHEENmaster · · Score: 5, Funny

    First they hit their first flat quarter, and then Israel tells them to fuck off. Next thing you know, some fat pervert in a butterfly suit will be without a job.

    --
    You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
    1. Re:downturn for M$? by Jaysyn · · Score: 0, Troll

      Troll? Oh come on now, that is funny!

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    2. Re:downturn for M$? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you talking about

    3. Re:downturn for M$? by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Well, the bible has it quite clear what G-d does to those who oppose israel...

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    4. Re:downturn for M$? by RoLi · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Fact is Microsoft has not much to gain and a lot to lose. All their non-x86-desktop efforts are losing massively money (XBox) or marketshare (IIS) or both (WinCE, Stinger-cellphones).

      All loyal MS customers who use MS technology (like .NET): Expect to pay more for your licenses.

      All MS-critics who use cross-platform technology (like Java, OpenOffice): Expect Microsoft to reward your forward thinking with sweet discounts.

    5. Re:downturn for M$? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Not really, the only part of the Bible that I can think of that speaks specifically of this is the Moses story (assuming we are refering to what a Jewish person would mean by the Bible). I personally believe that was more of a zionistic culturally defining tale than anything else.

    6. Re:downturn for M$? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I personally believe that was more of a zionistic culturally defining tale than anything else.

      Erm... yes... but what did you think the rest of the Bible was?

    7. Re:downturn for M$? by flamelord · · Score: 0

      I don't see how this is a problem for Microsoft. These guys have a monopoly and whether israel wants to use their software or not is not going to change that. I mean, with 90% marketshare MS is not going to be a dinosaur anytime soon, and if their markeshare keeps growing, that is also not good for MS, since then it would be technically considered a monopoly.

      And choosing a non-MS solution does not make one "anti-microsoft"; it simply means you have little use for their products, or a preference for other products.

    8. Re:downturn for M$? by JoshWurzel · · Score: 1

      You forgot one non-x86-desktop effort: Mac Business Unit. This is a huge money maker for MS.

    9. Re:downturn for M$? by NortWind · · Score: 1

      You are forgetting the effect of positive feedback. It works for you when you are establishing your monopoly, as the more you own the easier it is to push the next piece. But at some point, which is often hard to predict or even see when it happens, positive feedback starts to work the other way, against you.

      MS is locked into maintaining ever-increasing returns, quarter by quarter. There is no way to expand the market, as everybody is already using their product. As soon as some present customer defects, they have to make up the loss by turning the profit knob, which they always have been able to do safely with core products until now.

      But now may be a different time, and every turn of the profit knob by raising prices, killing old products, boosting licensing fees, and so on may bring even more defections. More defections, more crank turning, and so it goes, with the action feeding on itself.

    10. Re:downturn for M$? by madpierre · · Score: 1

      The first OS to feature a stone tablet interface?

      Presumably.

      --
      siggy played guitar
    11. Re:downturn for M$? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that when the M$ pyramid collapses, it will do so in a catastrophic manner totally without warning. One day they'll be riding high telling everyone to buy, buy, buy. The next day they'll be in bankruptcy court trying to explain where their $10 billion stockpile went, and why it was so important to give most of it to the managers a la enron.

    12. Re:downturn for M$? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt it. Microsoft (as much as I hate it) is a highly competitive company, while Enron had their execs stacked with ameri-con get-rich-quick white collar criminals.

      Even if MS looses their dominance in the OS market, they will still have a very significant slice of the pie. They will always be #1 in ease of installation and hardware configuration, (the latter follows almost inherently). Even neglecting this, some folks would still stick with windows just because they are used to it and are not the sort of people to try something new.

  5. Standing their ground by CelticWhisper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Whatever happens, it's good to see that at least someone is standing fast against the Microsoft juggernaut. This is looking to be very good for the OSS movement. Not likely to be catastrophic to Microsoft, but at least it might knock them down a peg...please?

    --
    Help protect civil rights from abuse by the TSA - visit TSA News Blog.
    http://www.tsanewsblog.com
    1. Re:Standing their ground by ozric99 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Whatever happens, it's good to see that at least someone is standing fast against the Microsoft juggernaut.

      At last? People have been moving away from MS solutions for years. The "movement" is snowballing, and gaining more momentum as more and more media outlets report "alternative" software solutions like linux, but don't think the Israel govt are pioneering anything here; they're simply the latest in a long line of organisations moving away from MS (my current employer another example of the exodus).

    2. Re:Standing their ground by Saven+Marek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Whatever happens, it's good to see that at least someone is standing fast against the Microsoft juggernau

      What will be better is the result of this standing fast. Until recently, the FUD of "Linux is actually pricier than MS in the long run" didn't have a great deal of examples to look at to disprove it.

      If, in 2 years, the entire israeli government is still using OSS, hasn't paid license fees, is upgrading as they need and patching as they need, from open source solutions, and finds it's a saving, that's a very demontratable large scale deployment that screams out...

      "It Worked Here"

      Israel's standing fast and adopting the full open source solution will make it easier for other countries and companies to find an excuse to stand fast.

      nude macgirl webcams

    3. Re:Standing their ground by Frymaster · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Israel's standing fast and adopting the full open source solution will make it easier for other countries and companies to find an excuse to stand fast

      more importantly, this may help make inroads against the "ibm mindset"... you know, "nobody ever got fired for buying ibm".

      in the corporate culture there is a natural trend towards conservatism in business choices. if you go with the underdog and things go poorly, your decision becomes the focus of blame. if you go with the established, popular choice and things fail, the blame is more likely to go somewhere else.

      overcoming this mindset is crucial for oss to get adopted with the big purchasers. if enough large, conservative organizations (and the isreali gov't is pretty conservative and large) adopt Oo, this mindset might actually work in their favour

    4. Re:Standing their ground by Principal+Skinner · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Gosh, I don't know. The Israeli gov't accounts for 4% of MS Israel's business. That's just MS Israel. And we're just talking about the Finance Ministry, which is just a part of the Gov't. I think this is tangible movement, but I wouldn't call it snowballing.

      FLOSS has for several years been "about to hit it big", but every time I see a report on OpenOffice.org or StarOffice, it's "it works pretty well, but MS Word sometimes has problems opening its documents... nice effort, but I'll stick with my M$, thanks", and similar for GNU/Linux. Yes, more media outlets have been reporting on it -- instead of saying "Linux? What's that?" the public are now saying "Linux? Why bother?"

      Oh, and the parent poster said "at least", not "at last". FWIW :-)

      --
      one hundred twenty
      is just enough characters
      to write a haiku
    5. Re:Standing their ground by deranged+unix+nut · · Score: 1

      more importantly, this may help make inroads against the "ibm mindset"... you know, "nobody ever got fired for buying ibm".

      Funny how things change, with IBM supporting linux, technically this would be "nobody ever got fired for buying ibm" making inroads again. :)

    6. Re:Standing their ground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone's going to stubbornly stand up against Microsoft, it's Israel. Like it or not, but if anybody knows how to negotiate by refusing to negotiate, they're it.

    7. Re:Standing their ground by cerberusss · · Score: 1
      moving away from MS (my current employer another example of the exodus)

      In another discussion there was another thread about how the formats lock you in. So I was curious what replaced MS Office? StarOffice? Were there any file format problems with customers?

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    8. Re:Standing their ground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just a note, the Isralei gvt. is a mix of very conservative and very liberal depending on the issue. At least from our US perspective of conservative/liberal (which have almost nothing to do with the real meaning of the terms.. but oh well).

    9. Re:Standing their ground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uhh, who wants to click on the link, "nude macgirl webcams"? (to make sure it's not goatse)

    10. Re:Standing their ground by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      "conservative" and "liberal" are purely relative terms much like "right" and "left".

      They are inherently meaningless.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    11. Re:Standing their ground by mAineAc · · Score: 1

      The biggest problem I see with compatability with Open/Star Office with Microsoft Office is the macros. They use vb which is proprietary to Microsoft, this isn't a big problem though unless you like to use insecure software.

    12. Re:Standing their ground by ozric99 · · Score: 1

      Well, We still use NT4 desktops with Office97 (how progressive!). The switch is being made at server level - from IIS to Websphere/Apache.

    13. Re:Standing their ground by Dalcius · · Score: 1

      "overcoming this [nobody ever got fired for buying ibm] mindset is crucial for oss to get adopted with the big purchasers."

      I wouldn't look at it like that. I think what you'll see is people saying "Nobody ever got fired for using _________" where the blank is OpenOffice, StarOffice, SomeOtherProductBasedOnOSS. One or a few companies will make products based on OSS/open standards and then people will just assume that buying from them is the way to go.

      At the most, if you don't see people substituting an OSS-based company for Microsoft, you'll hear people saying "Nobody ever got fired for using Open Source," though I doubt that's the way it will go. It'll all be OSS, but companies will be at the helm.

      Wouldn't it be ironic to see MS leading that fleet? :p

      Cheers

      --
      ~Dalcius
      Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
    14. Re:Standing their ground by davecb · · Score: 1
      There's a bit of a tradition to Israeli negotiations that can be startling to outsiders: when an agreement is reached, one party or the other tosses in a deal-breaker (;-))

      My old director said this is like walking right away from the table if the deal doesn't meet your expectations. He called this soemthing lika a "balls test".

      Must be stressful for a company expecting North American styles of negotiation: imagine a client with that much chutzpa!

      --dave

      --
      davecb@spamcop.net
    15. Re:Standing their ground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone's going to stubbornly stand up against Microsoft, it's Israel. Like it or not, but if anybody knows how to negotiate by refusing to negotiate, they're it.

      LOL. If needs be they can keep it up for a few decades. Unless Israel invades Redmond Microsoft is unlikely to try that long.

    16. Re:Standing their ground by PishiGorbeh · · Score: 1

      What about the Chinese ministry of technology? They have commited in thier decission to use OSS and dump MS. MS has been losing markets ever since they decided to go after the top sector of the server market. MS uses the same approch for for all of their customers big or small and they are finding out that it doesn't work. Here in Iran we have no international copyright laws. I couldn't buy MS legally even if I wanted to! It's interesting to see though, that at every software store here you can buy RH linux 9 and Windows XP each for about $2 USD and still no one even touches the linux. My point: If MS didn't play consumer/ end user tactics with Corp./ Government buyers, then MS would not have these problems. After all, and like it or not... MS makes good products.

    17. Re:Standing their ground by IchBinEinPenguin · · Score: 1

      Just because some beaurocrat didn't reverse an earlier decisions does not mean they made the right one,
      all it menas is they're unwilling to admit they made the wrong one.

      OK.. I'm pro-LINUX, wish them all the best and think they'll be happy with LINUX, I'm just waiting for a better
      indicator than that to 'prove' that LINUX is the right choice (and so will a lot of other cynics out there).

      By your reasoning Microsoft must be the better choice because, for the moment, more people are sticking with it rather than go to LINUX.

    18. Re:Standing their ground by 4of12 · · Score: 1

      if you go with the established, popular choice and things fail, the blame is more likely to go somewhere else.

      Given the lucrative margins and excellent profits MS has made from their OS and from Office over the years, they probably think they've been compensated well for taking blame in these situations, whether they've deserved it or not.

      Give me a US$5e10 pile of cash and you can call me scum-sucking leech, too!

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
  6. According to the article... by davidstrauss · · Score: 1

    ...this is probably standard practice for large Microsoft contracts.

    1. Re:According to the article... by optikSmoke · · Score: 5, Funny
      ...this is probably standard practice for large Microsoft contracts.

      Indeed, and it goes like this:

      MS: So, we're going to sell you our lock-in software at inflated prices because you obviously have no other alternative; then be prepared for a mandatory accelerating upgrade cycle combined with price hikes.

      Customer: So.... we were thinking maybe of using open-source softw-

      MS: We can do software individually wrapped with gold foil and a complementary kiss on the ass.

      Customer: SOLD!

    2. Re:According to the article... by jimicus · · Score: 1
      Yes, but right at the bottom of the Yahoo article it also says that 'In Thailand and England there were reductions of hundreds of percent" on products that it sells.'

      Hundreds of percent, eh? Cool. Who do I contact at Microsoft to get my cheque?

  7. Split the components of Office? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    On the box they used to be shaped like jigsaw puzzle pieces, it can't be hard to separate them.

    1. Re:Split the components of Office? by CoolVibe · · Score: 1
      Not after you install it. Then you find out that all the jigsaw pieces are stuck together with superglue!

      Such an illusion. But that's packaging for ya.

    2. Re:Split the components of Office? by Jonathan+Quince · · Score: 2, Interesting
      On the box they used to be shaped like jigsaw puzzle pieces, it can't be hard to separate them.

      But back then, IIRC, you could buy them as separate components. And now that you can't, the logo is different; it's all connected together as one big set of loops for Office 2003. Hmmm...

      --
      Microsoft Windows is, fittingly, the official Desktop OS of Olig
    3. Re:Split the components of Office? by morelife · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeh they can split up the office quick as you please if it means sales to another country or big account, but when the DOJ says to break up components all we hear is how it's an integrated platform designed to have office explorer and the oS run together.

    4. Re:Split the components of Office? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      O
      h
      R
      e
      a
      l
      l
      y?
      Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 2.3). Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 2.3).

    5. Re:Split the components of Office? by prockcore · · Score: 1

      On the box they used to be shaped like jigsaw puzzle pieces, it can't be hard to separate them.

      Well, you know how some puzzle enthusiasts use glue to hold a finished puzzle together?

      Microsoft dumps a vat of tar to keep their's together.

    6. Re:Split the components of Office? by Haeleth · · Score: 5, Funny

      Microsoft dumps a vat of tar to keep their's together.

      No, Microsoft would never use tar. They use a proprietary file format called CAB.

  8. Will they understand now? by hdparm · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Money is not everything. Balmmer made a trip down under to cut pricing to Telstra - Telstra is scrapping Windows desktop for different solution. Israel government's NO seems firm.

    Microsoft, you need to make cheaper software. You also need to sell it in a way customer wants it sold, not in a way that generates maximum earnings, while screwing everybody, left and right.

    Monopoly doesn't work anymore. There are alternatives and they work well.

    1. Re:Will they understand now? by tealover · · Score: 1

      Money is not everything

      Then what is it about?

      Microsoft, you need to make cheaper software

      Oh, that definitely clears things up!

      --
      -- You see, there would be these conclusions that you could jump to
    2. Re:Will they understand now? by js7a · · Score: 2, Funny
      Microsoft, you need to make cheaper software.

      They're obviously listening. As Mekkab said, "Use the promotional code 'LINUX; and get thousands off your Microsoft installation costs!"

      Quoth the article:

      Microsoft, [the Israeli Finance Ministry] said, "has recently broken its policy of unified pricing of products worldwide. In Thailand and England there were reductions of hundreds of percent" on products that it sells.

      Now that's the kind of discount I'd sure like to see more of!

    3. Re:Will they understand now? by hdparm · · Score: 0

      You know, there are also long-forgotten things in business - fair trade and good service. Are they (MS) allowed to screw everybody just because they are the richest company in the world? Having fat wallet does not give one right to do business in a way it's not supposed to be done.

    4. Re:Will they understand now? by TWX · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Are they (MS) allowed to screw everybody just because they are the richest company in the world?"

      They are quite far from being the richest company in the world. They simply have a lot of liquid assets, and sit in a position that gets them a lot of attention. GM for a while was considered the largest company in the world, but with oil company mergers (Exxon-Mobile anyone?), car company mergers (DaimlerChrysler, combining Daimler, Mercedes Benz, Chrysler, and Mitsubishi Motors), there are a lot of other large, wealthy companies. Microsoft has a lot of money, but if their customer-base as it stands dries up, they don't have a lot of fixed assets.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    5. Re:Will they understand now? by Saven+Marek · · Score: 1

      > Money is not everything. Balmmer made a trip down
      > under to cut pricing to Telstra - Telstra is scrapping
      > Windows desktop for different solution. Israel
      > government's NO seems firm.

      Nail on the head. Money isn't everything, but TRUST is. No matter what a company like MS says, no matter what contracts may seem to say, Any manager worth their salt will know for sure that getting caught up with MS is a trap. Sure, they might get office components separately for a year or two, but Microsoft's record has shown they WILL find a way to drag you back into their line.

      Open source solutions take the need to trust away from microsoft and puts it in your own pocket. You don't need to trust "oss developers" as, in the end, you can just be one yourself.

      nude macgirls webcam

    6. Re:Will they understand now? by Xtifr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > Money is not everything

      Then what is it about?

      He didn't say money wasn't a factor, he said money wasn't everything. So your question should really be phrased, "what else is it about?" And in this case, one of the things it seems to be about is Hebrew language support. There may be (probably are) other issues as well. (Like trust, like promoting a local software industry, like not getting locked into one-sided long-term contracts, like control of your own destiny, like freedom, etc.)

      > Microsoft, you need to make cheaper software

      Oh, that definitely clears things up!

      Yes, if you chop out the part where he says, "You also need..." and then lists stuff, then maybe you can (pretend to?) completely misunderstand what he had to say. With journalistic skills like that, I bet you could get a job as a slashdot editor. :)

    7. Re:Will they understand now? by King_TJ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is true up to a point. The line about "just become an OSS developer yourself!" is getting stale though. Companies have always taken that option into consideration, no matter what platform they used.

      I've worked for several places where each time a special piece of software was needed for a task, the question came up of "Should we assign that job to our software development team, or is there a pre-made solution that will do the job?" These were typically "Microsoft shops" too.

      Open source is teriffic, but the fact still remains that most businesses prefer pre-packaged solutions, provided at a perceived fair price and with some level of trust/confidence the product will be supported in the future. Your software development team is a costly resource that can only work on so much code at one time. You don't want them building a big solution you could have gotten 95% of for 1/3rd. the cost if you just visited your software store.

      That's why companies *do* need to feel they can trust open source developers. The most widely implemented packages in Linux are all projects that are "tried and true" solutions, with long histories of updates and support. (Apache, postfix, mysql, etc. etc.)

    8. Re:Will they understand now? by m00nun1t · · Score: 1

      What FUD.

      Ballmers trip to Australia was planned months before telstra starting making noises. It certainly was convenient timing, but nothing more.

      Telstra is NOT scrapping Windows desktop. Telstra is talking about it, muttering about it, making noises, but show me one firm plan of confirmation of a wide scale deployment.

    9. Re:Will they understand now? by Saven+Marek · · Score: 2

      OK, there is a level of trust, and perhaps I'm blinded by believing open source developers are more trustworthy than MS, just by nature. And yes, apache, linux itself, KDE etc, have all demonstrated trustworthiness.

      I should have clarified a point, too. I don't believe a small business, or small company, can really get much benefit out of having full access to source code for say, an office app. It may help with some patches for quick fixing of bugs if they have a diligent IT person, or happen to luck upon someone who has the capability to work on extra features.

      However something the size of the entire israeli government should, IMHO, be perfectly capable of bringing in their own (even fulltime) developers who can do some full scale customizing of applications as needed. Across deployments of tens of thousands of workstations, I'd see this as viable.

      nude macgirl webcams

    10. Re:Will they understand now? by hdparm · · Score: 1

      That was just figurative speech. I believe GE is the richest one at the moment but not entirely sure.

    11. Re:Will they understand now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Nail on the head. Money isn't everything, but TRUST is"

      Precedent is also important. The posting notes: "Israel govt's purchases account for 3-4% of MS Israel's annual revenue."

      That's an 'ouch' for MS Israel, but probably doesn't amount to a whole heck of a lot for MS overall. But it looks extremely bad for them when countries go with OSS instead of them, making OSS look like a credible and perhaps preferable option. I bet the words 'domino theory' have been heard echoing in the halls of Redmond.

    12. Re:Will they understand now? by RoLi · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Microsoft, you need to make cheaper software.

      Their software is cheap. Windows and Office are essentially just repackaged and made incompatible every 3-4 years, some features added and that's it. Not really expensive.

      It's just sold expensively, to pay for XBox, MSN, WinCE and their profits of course.

    13. Re:Will they understand now? by gregorio · · Score: 1

      Windows and Office are essentially just repackaged and made incompatible every 3-4 years

      Tell that to my Windows XP, wich will run any Windows 1.0 app.
      Now pick up a 10 year old Linux binary.

    14. Re:Will they understand now? by RoLi · · Score: 1

      Of course they will read the old formats, the point is that new, incompatible formats are introduced.

    15. Re:Will they understand now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their software is cheap. Windows and Office are essentially just repackaged and made incompatible every 3-4 years, some features added and that's it. Not really expensive.

      But, damnit, that is expensive! I curse that inefficiency every time I have to convert a document that's only 2 years old and then have to reformat the thing. Office isn't compatible with Office anymore! And that costs me time and that costs me money!

    16. Re:Will they understand now? by haggar · · Score: 1

      I have to disagree. Microsoft is the company withthe largest cash reserves in the world. There are larger, much larger companies, in fact (I am totally surprised that you didn't mention GE in your post, as that's THE largest company in the world), but their assets are smaller than Microsoft's.

      --
      Sigged!
    17. Re:Will they understand now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is a weird argument. Honestly, when was the last time you wanted to run a 10 year old linux binary? 10 years ago perhaps? Since the source code is almost always available for those 10 year old programs, if they are worth anything to anybody, there is an up to date version that runs better than the 10 year old binary would. You are asking me to drool over backwards compatibility that shouldn't have to exist in the first place, a second rate solution. It is just a hack to fix bad software distribution practices that were largely popularized by microsoft.

    18. Re:Will they understand now? by pantherace · · Score: 1

      look at 2.6.1 changelog, they infact mention running an old a.out format (x86) on x86-64 the only thing not working from an early (suse?) was emacs, which the author didn't take the time to track down.

    19. Re:Will they understand now? by Trejus · · Score: 1

      As the IT guy for a small business (as in son of owner), I have to agree that having access to the source is practically useless. Frankly, I don't have the time or desire to fix someone else's software. But more importantly, I don't find the need. From what I've seen, OSS just works. Which isn't to say that it works perfectly, but when it fails, it fails in a predictable way that isn't very annoying.

      More importantly, there is a hidden benefit to OSS, and that is most of the products we use (Mozilla, apache, Eclipse, postgreSQL) are completely cross-platform, which means that we can avoid vendor-lock in and actually have some choices in the software we use. As a very small company, this is the only real leverage we have. Plus the money saved on lincenses is pure profit.

      --
      "To save the planet, I had to go to the worst spot on Earth, and that was Philadelphia." -- Sun Ra
    20. Re:Will they understand now? by iabervon · · Score: 1

      For a small software company, having the source is actually extremely useful, because it's more accurate documentation than any natural language documentation. If you're having some problem, you can often actually identify what the program is doing in that case, and figure out a workaround. If you're used to having that level of access, using software without having the source is like trying to figure out how to operate a VCR from the Consumer Reports review. Even if you can't modify and build the software (or it wouldn't help if you did, because you need to support people running the official version), being able to identify the software's actual quirks, as opposed to the documented ones, is extremely valuable.

      Of course, this depends on the code being somewhat clear, which office apps really aren't, and it depends on being able to understand the language the programs are in, which most people can't.

    21. Re:Will they understand now? by gregorio · · Score: 1
      You are asking me to drool over backwards compatibility that shouldn't have to exist in the first place, a second rate solution. It is just a hack to fix bad software distribution practices that were largely popularized by microsoft.
      I'm sorry, but M$ sux today because they have backwards compatibility? I thought you people were saying that they're always breaking compatibility to "smash competitors".

      I think you really need to decide why do you hate them or at least why they suck..
  9. I Like This by jmt9581 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's good to see Israel encouraging competition (from the Yahoo Article:

    "Seeking to cut costs, the Finance Ministry recently said it would not purchase new software from Microsoft this year.

    It also said it would encourage the development of lower-priced alternatives. To that end, it is cooperating with Sun Microsystems (NasdaqNM:SUNW - News) and IBM (NYSE:IBM - News) to design a Hebrew language version of OpenOffice software, a freely distributed open-source alternative to Office."


    After all of the anticompetitive and unethical behavior that we've seen out of Microsoft, I think that they deserve this. Especially after their I'm glad that Israel is standing firm on this. Netscape may be dead, but perhaps we've learned some lessons on how to effectively deal with an unethical monopoly.

    --

    My blog

  10. still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    This was another of Israel's recent problems with microsoft. MS wouldn't implement it even when they offered to pay.

    1. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by chadamir · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not as easy as it sounds. Hebrew is written from right to left and has a different way of writing vowels. It would probably take quite a bit of time to recode the entire thing to support hebrew.

    2. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by be-fan · · Score: 1

      And note that the Office Mac and Office Windows codebases are significantly different, so just because Office for Windows supports it, it doesn't mean that Office Mac should support it.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    3. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by CoolVibe · · Score: 1
      KDE and GNOME have no problems with bidirectional languages. Also many different types of input methods are supported.

      Maybe the ability of the free *nixen wrt input methods, locales and bidirectional text might have won Israel over. The internationalisation effort on the free systems certainly is a lot futher than Microsoft has ever gotten. The fact still is that you need a special japanese windows version to write japanese in it, same goes for arabic, hebrew or whatever language you write in.

      With UNIX-like systems, you only need ONE system. The internationalisation is all done in userspace, and easily added without changing the core system.

    4. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by 1u3hr · · Score: 3, Informative
      It's not as easy as it sounds.

      There have been Chinese versions of MS Office for almost 10 years. That's a lot harder than alphabetic scripts like Hebrew.

    5. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by Jonathan+Quince · · Score: 1

      Any decent desktop application nowadays has bidi support. Office 2000 (especially Word) had a lot of bugs in that regard, but they seem to have shaken them out in Office XP and up for Windows. So why can't they get it together for the Mac version?

      Of course, Windows (starting with Windows 2000) has excellent system-level features that help programmers handle Unicode, bidi, mirroring, etc. I have no idea whether or not the Mac platform makes a similar effort to facilitate i18n/l10n. Any Mac programmers around here care to comment about that?

      As for nikkudim (vowel markings), I don't see how support could be substantially more complicated than for accented Latin characters. (Though I haven't tried, so I could be wrong.)

      --
      Microsoft Windows is, fittingly, the official Desktop OS of Olig
    6. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by Derivin · · Score: 5, Informative

      There are plenty of other languages which read left to right and are supported like Arabic. There are harder asian languages supported: Korean, Japanese, and the worst Chinese.
      Mac OSX supports Hebrew. The real issue is cost, not ease. Working for a speech/language company, it is the total cost of a product, not how hard it is to develop that kills most projects like this.
      We dropped Japanese, not because it was hard (the product was complete and japanese had been done in previous versions). It was dropped because the salary for QA, support, management, OEM sales chain, advertising, and maintanance were just too high. There was very little reuse of staff due to the language, a QA engineer who does not know Japanese (Hebrew) isn't going to be any help. One more language means one more product in the release schedual, which extends the time it takes to make releases and move on to developing the next new killer feature.
      What incentive does MS really have? Some small % of the 4% of their sales in a country (This is Mac specific, not all %4 is Mac). It's a big drop in the bucket, but its not enough to pay for all those people and the potential for derailment of other projects. What is the potential to sell this 'feature' to recoup the cost? HEbrew on Mac Office? Very little to none I'd guess.

      No, its not because its 'hard' (and I doubt its that). It's cost verses potential profit. When looking for a reason, look to money first.

    7. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by YouHaveSnail · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not as easy as it sounds.

      It's probably a lot easier than it sounds, or at least easier than Microsoft would admit.

      Apple has historically provided OS-level support for Hebrew and other non-Roman languages. I can imagine that a word processor like Word might do its own text input and rendering for the document view, but the rest of Word and indeed the rest of Office should be able to take advantage easily of the support that Apple offers. This was certainly true for MacOS 8 and 9, and this page and my own experience lead me to believe that OS X's support for other languages is even better than it was in those older systems.

      I suspect that MS is simply dragging its feet on implementing Hebrew in Office for Macintosh because a) it's more work for them and b) the alternative is Windows.

    8. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      They offered to pay for the conversion.

    9. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by abulafia · · Score: 1
      When looking for a reason, look to money first.

      And a noisy bunch hitting your reputation.

      --
      I forget what 8 was for.
    10. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

      OK, cost not ease. No problem agreeing with that. Just for the hell of it (not trolling) I'd like to see if the ancient Egyptian heiroglyphs can be supported. Just to "push the envelope". Granted, the potential user base is tiny, but I'd like to know if its even possible. OTOH potential users such as University archaeology/ancient studies departments could be *very* ($$$) interested in that, I imagine. Just wondering about it, anyway.

      --
      C|N>K
    11. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by Keeper · · Score: 1

      The complaint wasn't about the PC version of Office, rather the Mac version. I suspect the next version of Office for the Mac will have that support in it. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to divert resources to modify a version of the product which will be replaced in a few months by something else which already has that support in it ...

    12. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by corebreech · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A market of over a billion versus one of, what, six million?

      Which one would you write for?

      (btw, I'm not sure the elaborate glyphs are what make Chinese more complicated, but rather the vertical orientation. Right-to-left is basically the same code as left-to-right text, only factored for bi-directionality. But vertical text? Thar be dragons there!)

    13. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by corebreech · · Score: 1

      That isn't really relevant. Good architecture mandates taking a top-down perspective on a project. You don't let the tail wag the dog.

      Have you seen the code? There are undoubtedly many issues with Hebrew support, and if only one impacts architecture, Microsoft is within its rights to say no, even if there is money being offered here.

    14. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhm - there were rumours that claimed that someone offered to pay for the conversion. There was never an actual, documented offer.

    15. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's a conspiracy against the jews. Damn Indians get farmed work from MS. Boycott MS. (thank you)

    16. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

      Why can't the universities just PAY the 3rd/4th year computer programmers to mod the OpenOffice to support it? Better yet, waive all uni fees/and refund all they paid, that way it bypasses the tax man.

      Why pay MS. Its better students get the cash.

      --
      Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
    17. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by AvantLegion · · Score: 3, Insightful
      market of over a billion versus one of, what, six million?

      Which one would you write for?

      When the market of over a billion pirates my software instead of buying it, I go for the six million that might actually pay.

    18. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by Branka96 · · Score: 1

      Apple had no support for Hebrew and Arabic and a lot of other languages in OS X 10.0. The first version of Office for OS X targeted OS X 10.1 which did not have support for Hebrew and Arabic. 10.1 was released 9/25/2001. Office X was released 11/19/2001. It wasn't before Apple release OS X 10.2 (8/26/2002) that the OS had support for Hebrew and Arabic.
      Microsoft has just announced a new version of Office for OS X (to be released in Q2). I would be surprised if it did not have support for Hebrew and Arabic.

    19. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by corebreech · · Score: 1

      Well, you've got people on here maintaining that Israel isn't that much better in that department, so I'm not sure you can get all high and mighty on the Chinese.

    20. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by SerpentMage · · Score: 1

      Funny in many other industries like car's, or other products when the client is willing to pay for it you do it. It is called "easy money".

      No I think this is more of an issue, "Oh gee do we really have to do this?". It is an arrogance and not wanting the bother issue. If MS were desparate for business they would do it. Especially if the client is willing to pay for it.

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    21. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by RoLi · · Score: 1
      Nobody has ever claimed that Microsoft is competent enough to do it in a reasonable time.

      But why wait for years for Microsoft to sell you a product more expensive than all others when alternatives exist right now?

    22. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      A market of over a billion versus one of, what, six million?
      Which one would you write for?

      You might have noticed the statement I was addressing was "It's not as easy as it sounds", not "which is the more lucrative".

      (btw, I'm not sure the elaborate glyphs are what make Chinese more complicated

      No, it's not. There are many decorative English fonts with more complicated glyphs thah an average Chinese one. The complexity is that you need at least 5000 glyphs for a Chinese font. That was a big problem when most software encoded characters with a single byte. Various workarounds were found to allow Chinese software to use 2 bytes, but since Unicode is supposedly now the standard for Windows and Office, that should not be such a problem. Hebrew is an alphabetic language, and so has a few dozen glyphs, about the same as Latin languages.

    23. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      The fact still is that you need a special japanese windows version to write japanese in it

      Well, damn! There I was thinking I'd been writing Japanese in a standard English version of Windows 2000 for all these years! Heck, my applications have even been displaying menus and dialog boxes in Japanese. I guess it must just be a Microsoft proprietary Japanese-compatible language I'm using, instead of the real thing...

    24. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure the elaborate glyphs are what make Chinese more complicated, but rather the vertical orientation.

      Chinese script is written left to right, just like English. Go to some popular Chinese Websites if you don't believe me.

      Traditional / Classical Chinese was written top to bottom, but the script that everyone uses in their daily lives is left to right.

    25. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by calyphus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      However difficult it is doesn't change the fact that even TextEdit (the Notepad of OS X) supports Hebrew. The tools for implementing Hebrew support are built into OS X. All MS has to do is use them.

      --


      The potato it is uninformed.
    26. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by glenstar · · Score: 1
      Traditional / Classical Chinese was written top to bottom, but the script that everyone uses in their daily lives is left to right.

      That's true... for the most part. But there are certainly occassions (particularly with advertisements) where the characters are either vertical or right-to-left. Or, at least I assume so with Chinese... I know that is the case with Japanese.

    27. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by HiThere · · Score: 1

      They are definitely within their rights to refuse the business. And the client is within his rights to then become an ex-client. This isn't about rights. It might be about politics, I don't know Israeli politics well enough to even guess, but it's not about rights.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    28. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by dvdeug · · Score: 1

      There have been Chinese versions of MS Office for almost 10 years. That's a lot harder than alphabetic scripts like Hebrew.

      No, it's not. Chinese is about the simplest language to enable a computer for, in theory; it's a series of constant-width characters that don't word-wrap and don't combine in any way, all going right-to-left. The fact that there's 10,000 of them in modern use just dictates the size of ints you use to store characters. Hebrew gets complex because in modern use, they mix right-to-left (Hebrew) and left-to-right characters (Latin and numbers), as well as have the voweling system that needs to combine with the base system, yet be ignored in spell-checks and in searches. It's much more complex.

    29. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      The fact that there's 10,000 of them in modern use just dictates the size of ints you use to store characters.

      Exactly. No problem if you're starting from scratch, but all the legacy code using 1-byte characters has to be revised.

      I've seen and used all kinds of cobbled together Chinese enablers for DOS and Win 3. Tons of kludges. Also note that Chinese text also requires a full Latin set, and right-left, left-right and up-down orientations.

    30. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by dcmeserve · · Score: 2, Interesting
      We dropped Japanese, not because it was hard (the product was complete and japanese had been done in previous versions). It was dropped because the salary for QA, support, management, OEM sales chain, advertising, and maintanance were just too high. There was very little reuse of staff due to the language, a QA engineer who does not know Japanese (Hebrew) isn't going to be any help. One more language means one more product in the release schedual, which extends the time it takes to make releases and move on to developing the next new killer feature.

      Interesting -- in the context of popular software like OS's or office app's, what you say is a strong argument in favor of OSS over any proprietary solutions. With OSS, if users/customers really want a particular feature, and have the resources, they can just add it in themselves.

      If the Israeli govt. was offering a substantial payment to develop the Hebrew code, it stands to reason that they could instead hire enough local talent to handle the extra development, QA, support, etc. that you mention. -- if they had access to the source code. No need for them to be subject to MS's internal cost considerations for the support of the additional language.

      Of course, the original code would probably also have to be reasonably clean/organized to make that feasible. So even if MS were to open the source to them, it still might not be an option...

      --
      "Orthodoxy is unconsciousness" - Orwell
    31. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by corebreech · · Score: 1
      Or, so we're comparing installing a refrigerator in the dash with possibly rewriting the rendering engine of a world-class word processor to accommodate an atypical language.

      Let me ask you a question. What does this program do?
      10 PRINT "FIRST POST!"
      20 GOTO 10
    32. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by mpe · · Score: 1

      If the Israeli govt. was offering a substantial payment to develop the Hebrew code, it stands to reason that they could instead hire enough local talent to handle the extra development, QA, support, etc. that you mention.

      It's possibly easier, since they don't have currency markets complicating the budget. In the way that paying a foreign company could easily do.

      Of course, the original code would probably also have to be reasonably clean/organized to make that feasible.

      Which is more likely to be the case with OSS.

      So even if MS were to open the source to them, it still might not be an option...

      Or would be far more expensive that starting from scratch. Microsoft "opening" the code would only be to a few people too.

    33. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by corebreech · · Score: 1

      That's what I meant... what's the term I'm looking for... glyph set? Character set? I wanted to say alphabet but I know that's wrong for some reason.

    34. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      That's what I meant... what's the term I'm looking for... glyph set? Character set? I wanted to say alphabet but I know that's wrong for some reason.

      "Alphabet" comes from Greek: alpha, beta, gamma... It refers to a phonetic system of writing. I believe modern Latin, Greek, Russina, etc alphabets are descended from Phoenician, and Hebrew (aleph, beth, gimel...) and Arabic (alif, ba , ta...) are closely related. India, Thailand, Tibet and some others use a Sanskrit related alphabet. Chinese, Japanese and old Egyptian heiroglyphs might be called ideographs, where the written form is unrelated (except sometimes in a punning way) to the pronunciation.

      I think "character set" applies to both. "Glyphs", at least in typographic circles, refer to the exact graphic -- there is only one character "A" but untold numbers of "A" glyphs in different fonts, let alone handwriting.

    35. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "No, its not because its 'hard' (and I doubt its that). It's cost verses potential profit. When looking for a reason, look to money first."

      Really? Israel even proposed to pay for the Hebrew implementation. Cost to Microsoft: $0, Benefit to Microsoft: Their softwares are not kicked out.

      Benefit/Cost ratio=infinity.

    36. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by dvdeug · · Score: 1

      all the legacy code using 1-byte characters has to be revised.

      But only once for Japanese, Chinese, Korean or Unicode.

      Chinese text also requires a full Latin set

      Multiple copies of which are tucked away in most Chinese character sets.

      right-left, left-right and up-down orientations.

      For the most part, you can get by with left to right. Top to bottom is needed mainly for desktop publishing applications. I have never seen right-to-left Chinese, and the majority of Chinese systems can't handle it (in Unicode systems, it comes for free with Hebrew/Arabic support), so it's not a big worry in Chinese enabling.

    37. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      >all the legacy code using 1-byte characters has to be revised.
      But only once for Japanese, Chinese, Korean or Unicode.

      True. Doesn't (didn't) make it easier.

      >Chinese text also requires a full Latin set
      Multiple copies of which are tucked away in most Chinese character sets.

      I know. (Usually very shitty glyphs that look like a bastard hybrid of Times and Courier). That was in response to your(?) remark that Hebrew was more complex becasue it needs English support too; so does Chinese.

    38. Re:still no hebrew support in MS Office for mac by dvdeug · · Score: 1

      That was in response to your(?) remark that Hebrew was more complex becasue it needs English support too; so does Chinese.

      But it's just more glyphs in Chinese; English in Hebrew runs the opposite direction of the base text.

  11. Software Sales Cycle by SpinningAround · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Having worked on the sales side of the house for a couple of big enterprise software companies, I find it interesting that Microsoft are now very publically having to do what the rest of the enterprise software industry has done for a long time.. sell software when and how customers want it.

    All CIOs know it... don't buy 'till the last week of the quarter, suddenly discover an alternative solution at the last minute, wheel out competitor's products, competitor's salesguys, consultants and competitor. Beat that software vendor to death.

    Must be hard being a Microsoft enterprise rep or sales consultant these days. I am sure they are thoroughly sick of hearing the words 'Linux', and 'Open Source' at every sales meeting they attend.

    Not that I feel terribly sorry for them mind you...

    1. Re:Software Sales Cycle by jimicus · · Score: 1
      Yeah, but MS have it worse. They're trying to compete price-wise with free, they sound the trumpet of support to people who have tried calling for support a few times and know how bad it is, they sound the trumpet of quality to techs who have spent the last week clearing up after SirCam, CodeRed, , they shout about security to someone who's just discovered several gigs of porn on a public-facing server.

      Basically they've spent 20 years trying to build a monopoly at the expense of the customer, succeeded and now there may actually be some real competition. To top it off, the customers are well aware of this.

      Scary stuff for any company, no matter what they sell.

    2. Re:Software Sales Cycle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Competition is scary? I'd think it'd be a fact of business. Well, unless they're lazy.

  12. Could a finance person... by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

    ...explain how the purported 3-4% revenue from Microsoft Israel might actually impact their (respective) bottom lines? I understand that revenue does not directly translate into profit/loss, correct me if I'm wrong. What about PR in the US? Thanks in advance.

    --
    C|N>K
    1. Re:Could a finance person... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A finance person on Slashdot. Yeah, that'll happen. See, first, finance people have jobs. Secondly, they have this thing called maturity. Thirdly, most are probably out getting shit faced and laid.

      Maybe we can settle for a geek that's balanced his checkbook lately.

    2. Re:Could a finance person... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the domino (or snowball) effect.
      First the finance min. uses an alternative.
      All the people that work there get used to it and use it at home.
      The contractors and vendors start using the alternative too.
      Then the interns... some of the people that work at the ministry hold positions at universities - they bring the alternative to the class room.

      The kids of all of the aboves find it at home and like it...
      And in a few years half the population would switch ;-)

  13. The Right. The Drama(TM) by SubtleNuance · · Score: 1

    What is the GeoPolitical impact of Isreal undermining the financial base of America's Intellect-Industry.?

    Will Isreal's portion of foreign-aid increase or decrease?

    Please, talk amounghst yourselves.

  14. ISRAEL IS ON TEH SPOKE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    go get em ariel!

  15. Too bad for MS... by 3ngine · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ...but if they had fully supported Hebrew in the first place (as in, as fully functional as languages that input left to right - I've used Hebrew implementation in MS software and it ain't pretty), maybe they'd still be able to sell their software. I'm all for MS software, but I say go with what works - and it's obvious that MS products *don't* work in this instance.

    Maybe Israel would be more inclined to purchase MS again if MS would just fix the problem, hmmm?

    1. Re:Too bad for MS... by CoolVibe · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The kicker is that many *nix window managers and desktop environments do what Microsoft needs completely different versions of their OS for. And UNIX has worked for people with weird (read: non-ASCII) writing systems for AGES!

      Heck, I can fully understand why Israel says no.

    2. Re:Too bad for MS... by Rob+Simpson · · Score: 1
      (as in, as fully functional as languages that input left to right - I've used Hebrew implementation in MS software and it ain't pretty)

      How so? ?siht ekil epyt ot evah uoy oD

    3. Re:Too bad for MS... by dvdeug · · Score: 1

      And UNIX has worked for people with weird (read: non-ASCII) writing systems for AGES!

      Windows has always worked with non-ASCII writing systems. The latest version of Windows has usually handled more writing systems and more complex writing systems then Unix; for example, only recent versions of Gnome handle Hindi, and even they won't print Hindi. Windows has handled Hindi for a while.

  16. TERRIBLE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is the GeoPolitical impact of Isreal undermining the financial base of America's Intellect-Industry.?

    try again.

  17. Greater market at indirect risk by michael_cain · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Israel govt's purchases account for 3-4% of MS Israel's annual revenue.

    Of course, in the somewhat longer term, losing that 3-4% of the market will put pressure on the remainder of their sales in Israel. I'm sure that there will be a lot of businesses that will need to communicate with the government electronically. If MS Word and similar file formats can no longer be assumed to be correctly readable by government employees, then businesses will start shifting to software that produces files/attachments that they know can be read properly.

    1. Re:Greater market at indirect risk by Jason+Earl · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Exactly. Once the StarOffice formats become the de-facto standard for communicating with the government lots of other businesses are going to realize that they too can get away with using StarOffice (or OpenOffice.org). If the Israeli government does switch pretty soon every single business in Israel will find that they have to have at least one machine lying around with OpenOffice.org on it.

    2. Re:Greater market at indirect risk by stephanruby · · Score: 1
      If the Israeli government does switch pretty soon every single business in Israel will find that they have to have at least one machine lying around with OpenOffice.org on it.

      Or they could save their documents to an open format. It's an extra step, it's a little annoying, but it's doable.

    3. Re:Greater market at indirect risk by aardwolf204 · · Score: 1

      The whole point of having OpenOffice.org is that it will communicate with MS Word .doc's seamlessly, so if Israeli contractors already had Word installed, there would be no point to switching.

      Sure, Go OSS! OO.o rocks and all but its a long road to a higher market share.

      I tried to get a coworker to try out OO.org but she said "Eh, I've already got word, maybe if my next Dell doesnt come with it pre-installed, and even then what do I care, the IT dept. buys it for me anyway)

      --
      Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the /.crowd.May ur days b merry & bright & may al
    4. Re:Greater market at indirect risk by Jason+Earl · · Score: 2, Interesting

      OpenOffice.org will certainly open and save in MS Office formats. However, once you get OpenOffice.org on all of those government desktops how long do you think it is going to be before Israeli government workers are simply emailing around OpenOffice.org formats? MS Word is absolutely useless for opening OpenOffice.org documents. That will leave MS Office users with two alternatives.

      1. Teach clueless OpenOffice.org users how to save their documents in MS Office formats.
      2. Download OpenOffice.org so they can talk with government workers.

      Not to mention the fact that once OpenOffice.org becomes the de facto standard for government use lots of other Israeli companies are going to rethink their office suite strategy. Microsoft still has to sell upgrades, and they already have a hard time competing with older versions of their own product. Throw in competition from a useful Free Software office suite (that just happens to be the government standard), and selling MS Office just got to be a whole lot harder. Especially since folks just buying a "Dell" these days generally end up with Corel's PerfectOffice, and not MS Office.

      The fact of the matter is that these sorts of switches generally happen faster than you would think. I still remember when Lotus 1-2-3 and WordPerfect were the de-facto standards, and these products went from dominant to underdog in very little time.

    5. Re:Greater market at indirect risk by aardwolf204 · · Score: 1

      Your right, I didnt think about the fact that if the Govt is saving in OOo format the contractors will need to read the documents. Say a requirements document maybe? I mean, if anyone actually reads those anyway.

      --
      Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the /.crowd.May ur days b merry & bright & may al
    6. Re:Greater market at indirect risk by michael_cain · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The whole point of having OpenOffice.org is that it will communicate with MS Word .doc's seamlessly, so if Israeli contractors already had Word installed, there would be no point to switching.

      I tried using OpenOffice, and ran into constant small problems with opening documents prepared by MS Office tools. The problems with Word were mostly annoying -- the spacing slightly wrong here, a font size different there, etc. The problems with Excel and PowerPoint were much more serious. A noticable fraction of the slides were simply not readable. All of the spreadsheets except the very simplest ones had serious problems.

      If I'm a business person preparing a proposal or any other document for the government, and I know that the government official is going to open it with OpenOffice, I'm going to want to prepare it with OpenOffice.

    7. Re:Greater market at indirect risk by mpe · · Score: 1

      Once the StarOffice formats become the de-facto standard for communicating with the government lots of other businesses are going to realize that they too can get away with using StarOffice (or OpenOffice.org).

      With there being no valid reason for Israeli businesses to buy Office software for Microsoft. Then things start getting interesting. The US is a major trading partner with Israel. With it being illegal in the US to boycot Israeli businesses. Any US business which cannot accept .SXW/.SXC/etc documents from Israel companies is likely to have the FTC banging down their doors.

    8. Re:Greater market at indirect risk by mpe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      OpenOffice.org will certainly open and save in MS Office formats. However, once you get OpenOffice.org on all of those government desktops how long do you think it is going to be before Israeli government workers are simply emailing around OpenOffice.org formats?

      Especially given that the OpenOffice.org formats result in smaller files. Combined with the issues of MS Word documents possibly having data you don't want third parties to see.

  18. Correct Version. by DAldredge · · Score: 4, Funny

    .. .. ..
    Microsoft: *funds suicide bombers*
    Isreal: "We have NO idea how Mr. Gates and Mr Balmer ended up dead. Next question."

    1. Re:Correct Version. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isreal: "We have NO idea how Mr. Gates and Mr Balmer ended up dead. Next question."

      CNN: Our sources tell us the prevailing winds will blow the fallout southwest into Egypt, prompting Egyptian officals to consider their own ban on Microsoft Office.

      And in other news, new forensic analysis is believed to show that Laci Peterson was in fact a man. Michael Jackson has no comment.

      And Jon Benet Ramsey is still dead.

    2. Re:Correct Version. by bersl2 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Obviously you ACs out there haven't heard about Mossad before...

    3. Re:Correct Version. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    4. Re:Correct Version. by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      And again we have people hiding behind the AC ID because they are to scared to post from a logged in account.

      This happens quite a lot when Israel is brought up on this and other webboards. Why is that? Is it because those that state such 'beliefs' are cowards?

    5. Re:Correct Version. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      or because Israel has shown no hesitation in ignoring their own borders when it comes to arresting someone.

    6. Re:Correct Version. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel has borders?

    7. Re:Correct Version. by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      They those they arrested should not kill the women and childern on Isreal.

      If they stop, Isreal will stop.

      It is that simple.

    8. Re:Correct Version. by Fnkmaster · · Score: 1
      I'm sorry, I'm not clear where somebody has offered any sort of evidence that these strange IMs were other than coincidence, and that they were sent by Israeli intelligence. That's pure, rampant speculation - the people who reported it were Israelis and they were clearly puzzled at the time too. Presumably if there were anything behind it, the FBI would have discovered it - of course, I guess if we are going to spin conspiracy theories, they might as well include everyone.


      I suspect that many of the bizarre stories printed in the days and weeks after September 11th that we never heard anything about again disappeared from the radar simply because the truth behind them was so uninteresting that there was no story at all. Luckily, we have lots of annoying reporters to run around trying to get scoops in this country, and if there were something behind these conspiracy theories, we'd probably have heard about it by now.

    9. Re:Correct Version. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you hypocrite !!
      lying son of a bitch, Israel is the Nazi's dream land.

    10. Re:Correct Version. by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Please provide support to your claim. If you can't, well, just go play in traffic.

    11. Re:Correct Version. by ShinmaWa · · Score: 1

      And again we have people hiding behind the AC ID ... This happens quite a lot when Israel is brought up on this [...] webboard.

      Wow.. that also happens a lot whenever Microsoft is brought up ...also SCO! ...and Linux! ...and RedHat! ...and... air!

      What's your point?

      --
      The /. Effect: Thousands of users simultaneously accessing a site to not read its content.
    12. Re:Correct Version. by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Not exactly.

      I do not see very many people calling for the DEATH of an entire country and all it's people in those threads. If I am mistaken please provide me links.

      Thanks!

    13. Re:Correct Version. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet, we summarily deliver the verdict of guilty against Al Qaeda with far less evidence.

    14. Re:Correct Version. by ShinmaWa · · Score: 1

      I do not see very many people calling for the DEATH of an entire country and all it's people in those threads.

      Nor do I see very many people calling for the death of an entire country in this thread or any other... (although there was a reference to the untimely demise of Gates and Ballmer, who are richer than many entire countries). Sure, there might be a few trolls (and I suspect you are one as well), but that's nothing new either. There are trolls in every article.

      However, none of this has anything to do with your original comment that a lot of people posting AC in threads that deal with Israel. A lot of people post AC in every article.

      So, in short: What the hell are you smoking, man? Whatever it is, you should stop. It's gotten you paranoid.

      --
      The /. Effect: Thousands of users simultaneously accessing a site to not read its content.
    15. Re:Correct Version. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      ...

      Isreal: "We have NO idea how Mr. Gates and Mr Balmer ended up dead. Next question."


      And any speculation about Israel's involvement would lead to immediate accustions of antisemitism.

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    16. Re:Correct Version. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NEVER AGAIN!!!!!!!11

    17. Re:Correct Version. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess Osama admitting on videotape that he was behind it doesn't count as evidence? What kind of evidence do you want?

    18. Re:Correct Version. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What kind of evidence do you want?

      He wants the kind that points at a Jew, duh!

    19. Re:Correct Version. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      because Israel has shown no hesitation in ignoring their own borders when it comes to arresting someone.

      And Palestinians show no hesitation in ignoring their own borders when it comes to blowing up school children at a cafe.

      Which is worse? Getting arrested usually with some reasonable suspicion of guilt? Or getting blown up for no reason at all?

    20. Re:Correct Version. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm sorry, I'm not clear where somebody has offered any sort of evidence that these strange IMs were other than coincidence, and that they were sent by Israeli intelligence.

      No, it was obviouslly a satanic move to blow up the towers. Didn't you see that photo of the smoke with a rough face looking kind of like the western depiction of the devil?

    21. Re:Correct Version. by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Why do you think I am paranoid?

    22. Re:Correct Version. by madpierre · · Score: 1

      If the Isrealis do go with Open Office will the Palestinians
      plump for MSoffice just to be contrary (or vis a vis)?

      Well there would be peaceful dialogue between us if only we
      we could share documents.

      In the interest of peace & harmony in the Middle East I hope they
      remember to use plain old text or pdf. ;)

      --
      siggy played guitar
    23. Re:Correct Version. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This will bring some common ground between the two sides. Both will agree that all evil flows from Washington. But they will disagree on D.C or State.

  19. This must mean... by teamhasnoi · · Score: 2, Funny

    they just got CD-R burners over there! Welcome to piracy, Israel!

    1. Re:This must mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is most likly a troll, but I'll reply anyways.

      Actually, Israel has quite a huge 'warez' community. Many torrents, and the good old 'warez' sites are/were hosted in Israel since the goverment dosn't really care (yet?) about piracy.

      There is a problem that many sections there don't have more then dialup (it is changing now. There was a big monopoly by a phone company), but in Israel things travel very fast, gossip, or warez cds. Its not a matter of people 'stealing' on purpose, its just a matter of nobody giving a crap either way.

      Israel is very weird in that way. On the one hand it has advancements in Computers, Biology, etc... comparable, and somtimes better then even the best countries out there. Yet at the same time, it has been lagging in some of the adoption of the technilogies for the common guy.

      Guess thats what happens when a country is under a constant threat of war (think beyond palenstinians).

    2. Re:This must mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, Israel has quite a huge 'warez' community. Many torrents, and the good old 'warez' sites are/were hosted in Israel since the goverment dosn't really care (yet?) about piracy.

      So really, Israel is in no position to bitch here. If they want software vendors to pay special attention to their needs, maybe they should stop pirating software?

      Would you bend over backwards to produce a special version of your software knowing that the target audience has a particular affinity for theft?

      Probably not.

    3. Re:This must mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Would you bend over backwards to produce a special version of your software knowing that the target audience has a particular affinity for theft?

      Why not? Microsoft does it all the time. Look at what they're doing to try and keep China on MS software. China has some of the most rampant software piracy in the world.

      Besides, do you really think Windows and Office would be so dominant if it wasn't for the fact that a good chunk of the population of the world has pirated them once or more times?

      Hell, I haven't used a legally paid for piece of Microsoft software, um, ever.

  20. Re:Standard government policy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Yeah, I guess with all the Microsoft applications blowing up and crashing that would fit pretty well.

  21. Buying Office Programs as individual components by Tachys · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You notice that in these disputes they always say they don't want to buy MS software because MS makes them buy the whole Office Package. Then Microsoft "clarifies" claiming that you could have always bought MS Office programs seperately?

    1. Re:Buying Office Programs as individual components by Plug · · Score: 1

      This implies that (1) Microsoft lied or (2) the deal changes substantially when you play the "OSS" card.

      I'd go with a bit of both, although either stand up on their own.

    2. Re:Buying Office Programs as individual components by Keeper · · Score: 4, Informative

      You've always been able to buy each application in the Office suite standalone.

      Isreal is complaining that the Office bundle has one or more applications they don't want, but it is more expensive to buy the applications separately than it is to buy the bundle (well, DUH).

  22. Re:Hmmm.. by jmv · · Score: 2, Funny

    Microsoft: *funds suicide bombers*
    Israel: *nukes Redmond*

  23. Re:A joke! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh, catholic women don't have orgasms, they feel too guilty about it.

  24. Agreed! Just as long as you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...don't start hypocritically whining about "dumping" or "lowballing" when Office is sold for cheap.

    1. Re:Agreed! Just as long as you... by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Actually, MS has not been accused of lowballing/dumping in a long time. They have been accused (and convicted) of bundling AND lowballing/dumping WHILE being a monopoly.

      No doubt that MS will soon be dumping, but they do that now in selected area, but with the bundling. Example was that in china you could buy legal XP/office for USD $5. Likewise, students in a number of schools are able to get XP/Office for something like 50.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  25. Something dangerous to say on /. by UPAAntilles · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I'm going to say what a lot of other people won't say because they blindly hate Microsoft a little too much. (This is not an insult, please don't lump me in with a stereotype)

    Microsoft makes a good product. We all deride their security holes, but why do we know about them? (Linux, OS X, and BSD varients have holes too) Hackers target the OSes that the vast majority of computers use. (Why attack 4%, 8%, or 12% when you can attack the 76%?) Their OSes are relatively simple to use and cheap (remember things like OS/2?). If someone else could design a better product for the majority of users (not just powerusers, like many that read /.), the market would shift, slowly, but surely. Microsoft's 'monopoly' isn't about using it's power to force little guys out of the market, it's using its resources to make a better and cheaper product, which then runs the little guys out of the market. To some people Open Office has a great performance/cost ratio that overrides some features in MS Office. So be it. I personally like Office XP (but not 2003). Everybody has their preference and their willingness for compromise between performance and price. The most important part of things like Open Office is that it's inspiring competition, which means MS will produce a better product in the future. And that's something all consumers benefit from.

    1. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by Blue+Eagle+26 · · Score: 1, Funny

      Hi Steve! I havent seen you on slashdot in a while! With all these countrys switching to open source, I bet that private jet is coming in handy!

    2. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by potpie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      MS will produce a better product in the future.

      a little optimistic, aren't we? You make a good point. If Microsoft's products were absolutely horrible from a personal user viewpoint, then nobody would buy them. But you can't very well argue about cost effectiveness against a free product that is as basic as an office program.

      Let's face it, word processors and spreadsheets aren't exactly like GUIs and 3D graphics utilities. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there have been very few major improvements in word processing technology since they started making the page background white and the text black. "Word art" doesn't count, and especially not that annoying little paper clip thing (I want to bend him into an inappropriate shape).

      Think about it this way: they either pay 3-4% of MS's annual revenue... or they can pay nothing. Now, even if I had to type with my feet because the program only supported special foot-keyboards, I would STILL choose the free program. Maybe that was a bad analogy, but you get the point.

      --
      Esoteric reference.
    3. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by Jason+Earl · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The funny thing about office suites is that it doesn't really matter what you like, what matters is what everyone else uses. For example, I still think that WordPerfect is the best word processor I have ever used. However, you can't email WordPerfect documents to people and expect them to be able to read them, and so I spend a lot of time using MS Word.

      That's why deals like the Israeli government are so important. If Sun can win over the Israeli government to StarOffice then within a year or so every single Israeli business is going to have a copy of StarOffice (or OpenOffice.org) installed on one of their computers so that they can use StarOffice formats for correspondence with the government. Everyone ends up having to talk to the government, and you can bet that if the government switches office suites that is going to have a big impact on the rest of the Israeli market.

      Microsoft is going to have to switch tactics sooner or later. Right now Microsoft uses the fact that their formats are a de-facto standard to tie businesses to their upgrade treadmill. However, the days when Microsoft can walk into a business and dictate terms are over, and frankly, that's good for everyone. I have never thought that Microsoft was a monopoly, but I am glad to see them get a little competition.

    4. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by 1u3hr · · Score: 2, Insightful
      but surely. Microsoft's 'monopoly' isn't about using it's power to force little guys out of the market, it's using its resources to make a better and cheaper product, which then runs the little guys out of the market.

      The rest of your argument is reasonable, but this part is really not. There are many examples of MS "using it's power to force little guys out of the market". And not just little guys, but big ones (until MS had wiped them out, anyway). With bundling and OEM deals the competition is locked out. Eg Netscape, alternative all office suites (WordPerfect, Lotus, etc).

    5. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by deadmongrel · · Score: 1

      "Hackers" target the OSes that the vast majority of computers use
      somewhat true what everyones gripe here is that it doesn't take much brains to use the exploits.most critical security exploits can even be used by script kiddies. Sure all OSes have their problems but windows et al have more because security was a secondary goal.
      "other people won't say because they blindly hate Microsoft a little too much
      Hate- perhaps/perhaps not. but I have to disagree with you there. A lot of people hate microsoft for their business methods, quite a few people hate their products because there are indeed bad(Remember windows Me (bull crap)). hate them but I don't think blindly.

    6. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by pdaoust007 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      (Why attack 4%, 8%, or 12% when you can attack the 76%?)

      Funny that a lot of the grief we have had from MS attacks were because of IIS and SQL server... Both of which have significantly less market share than Apache and Oracle for example...

    7. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by GSloop · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You make a very *few* good points....

      But MS has used very sharp business practices to increase their profits, and screw others - namely customers, and competitors.

      But, simply because they might (in the future) make a better product, doesn't mean I'd really consider using them again.

      Guido might decide he'd only break your legs instead of killing you. Does that make you think - "Oh, Guido's turned over a new leaf. I think I'll make him a majority shareholder in my company!" ? I think not. MS is a sharp dealing company who uses thuggish tactics to screw over who it wills. That isn't going to change, and simply because they make it cheaper or better isn't going to make me put the scorpion in *my* pocket when I have other options.

      The real problem for Microsoft, is that much of the world feels this way, IMHO. This isn't a problem, when MS has all our balls in their iron grip. Most of us aren't willing to risk the pain, and don't have lots of options. But when those options DO appear, the whole world will line up to stick the shiv in MS's soon to be lifeless body.

      People may suck up to the bully when they have to. But that doesn't mean they loose their memory when they don't have to anymore.

      We'll see when and if Linux gets dominance in the PC market about security holes. But I suspect it will still be miles ahead of MS.

      (BTW, you don't want people to stereotype YOU, but you say "lot of other people won't say because they blindly hate Microsoft a little too much."

      Pot, meet kettle.

      Sheesh.

      Cheers,
      Greg

    8. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by GooTi · · Score: 1

      ..Their OSes are relatively simple to use and cheap...

      Cheap compared to what? OS/2 was expensive? You need to consider the price of every new version, and the 3rd party software needed to keep it working properly (firewall, antivirus, etc.). If you add it all, only very successful bussiness can afford it (hence piracy in a lot of small bussiness, at least here in the 4rd world).

      Microsoft's 'monopoly' isn't about using it's power to force little guys out of the market

      What about stuff like this?

      To some people Open Office has a great performance/cost ratio that overrides some features in MS Office

      That's right; the only real showstopper here is in the performance department. It's a pity Linux can run smoothly on a p-166, but when you need an easy-to-use desktop, {kde,gnome}+OOo, raise the bar usually up to 1GHz and up (same for ram).

    9. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by diakka · · Score: 1

      Perhaps it is not PC on Slashdot to say that MS makes some good products. And you are correct that MS does make some good products. I am personally a big fan of evolution, which models a lot of its UI on MS Outlook. But before you start giving Bill Gates a hummer, know this. MS, like most corporations is driven by greed. They make good software only to the extent that it benefits their bank account. More importantly, they will also not hesitate to subvert users' freedoms to make them more dependant on MS. MS Office file formats are a prime example of this. How can this possibly benefit consumers? Now maybe OO isn't quite up to MS Office in all respects, and that's fine. Why would anyone want to choose a technically inferior product? Because IN THE LONG RUN, Freedom is the more economical choice. I know it, many Slashdot readers know it, and by the looks of things, the Isreali Government knows it too.

      So just that you don't argue I'm a victim of Slashdot groupthink, sure, I can concede that MS makes some good products, but please stop parading the around singing the praises of MS and the "benefit to consumers" as if it were some kind of philanthropic company worthy of sainthood. That is so insulting to my intelligence.

      --
      -- Knowledge shared is power lost. -- Aleister Crowley
    10. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I hear people say this a lot; viruses are only restricted to MS-Windows just because Windows is tremendously popular.

      But I doubt the logic.

      What if I said, termites are only restricted to wood houses just because wood is tremdously popular?

    11. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Microsoft makes a good product? Let's just say that Linux plus GNOME or KDE (though now they seem to be interoperating pretty closely) had the hold on the industry that Microsoft does. Do you really think that Windows is technically superior to Linux? Do you believe that Microsoft Office is technically superior to OpenOffice? Actually, it might be, but it's such a mess it's hard to tell. Certainly any technical advantage it might have is offset by its long history of deliberate failure to interoperate.

      The most important part of things like OpenOffice is not that it inspires competition and that it will make Microsoft make a better product. What matters most about it is that it provides a working alternative to Microsoft Office. Wordpenis office (or corel office or whatever you want to call it) was terrible in terms of speed and reliability. (Is it just me, or is the word "Corel" on a software package synonymous with "Danger"?) The fact that it will drive Office to be more interoperable and in general a better product is a secondary benefit, which is generally only going to be a boon to help desk personnel.

      OpenOffice (and product like it) are their own reason to exist. If they are successful, Microsoft will be irrelevant, and Office is now only relevant to their existence in two ways; it drives their feature set since MS Office is the prime contender, and they would not exist if Office were not such a PITA.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    12. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      > Microsoft's 'monopoly' isn't about using it's power to force little guys out of the market, it's using its resources to make a better and cheaper product, which then runs the little guys out of the market.

      (Here goes my karma... Oh well...)

      Wrong.

      It's about using its resources to *buy* better and cheaper products, etc., etc. (IE, NT, Excel, Visio, ...)

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    13. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by Eep!_I'm_a_monkey! · · Score: 1

      I agree on the fact that Windows is pretty much the defacto for most non power users. I use and prefer Linux, but windows is much more non power user friendly. Ever try to install something in Linux without using an RPM? It may be second nature to some of us, but most people would be stymied by having to remember the CLI commands. Under windows its a matter of simply clicking on an installer icon.

    14. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by unclethursday · · Score: 1
      Microsoft makes a good product.

      I agree. Microsoft makes excellent mice and keyboards. It's just unfortunate that much of their user interface hardware is intrinsically tied to their software. All these buttons on my Microsoft Natural Keyboard for the WMP, calculator, etc. are pretty worthless if I try to use them on any other OS, or don't use other Microsoft software. In fact, on my keyboard, the only extra button that gets any use is the caculator one.

      But, I don't use Internet Explorer, it actually crashes my OS thanks to a corrupted patch from Microsoft; I use Mozilla Firebird. I don't use Outlook Express, because it is an infector just waiting for a virus; I use Mozilla Thunderbird. I don't use Word, because it's just as prone to accidentally infecting my PC as Outlook and I don't feel like purpetuating Microsoft's monopoly in the Office Suite Market; I use OpenOffice.org and have had no problems with learning it (about 5 minutes, and I'm hardly a power user like many people on /.), or using it to the fullest of my needs. I don't use the WMP to play music; I use Sonique or WinAmp (depending on my mood). I only use the WMP to play movie files when they are in WMP-only file formats; otherwise I use anything else I possibly can (I have a lot of media players on here).

      I'm also still running Windows 98 SE, not Windows XP; because I have no personal need for any Windows OS beyond what I have. And, since I don't use those programs (and other MS applications) on it, I don't have to worry about the forced upgrade cycle every time MS decides its time for people to switch so they see a huge rise in profits.

      I'm picking up my first laptop soon. But, it isn't going to run Windows; It's going to be a Macintosh PowerBook (I found when using my friend's Mac OSX iBook that it was much nicer than Windows in every user respect). And, when I get to needing a new PC, I'm going to make it a Linux and Windows 98 SE (just for games) dual boot... unless I decide to get one of the bazillion Windows XP Pro pirated copies out there... but, I don't know if I'll even bother with them.

    15. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by vigilology · · Score: 1

      I don't see why any business in Isreal should have to change from MS Office to whatever. Just use rtf.

    16. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Hackers target the OSes that the vast majority of computers use. (Why attack 4%, 8%, or 12% when you can attack the 76%?)

      I wish ppl woul stop pushing something that they do not know. Virus Writers do not go after MS because they are the large number. They go after them because they are easy. Plain and simple. Apache far outnumbers IIS, yet the web server that is attacked over and over is IIS.

      An even better example is that IIS now accounts for less than 50% of all https connection. These are normally used for on-line ordering. Yet MS systems/IIS account for nearly 100% of all credit card theft.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    17. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by fastdecade · · Score: 1

      If Sun can win over the Israeli government to StarOffice then within a year or so every single Israeli business is going to have a copy of StarOffice

      It will take longer than that: The govt will probably still keep MS office at the edge of its structure so asto work in with everyone else. Hopefully, they will take steps to break the format's dominance, though, because it would be in their interest having made this decision.

    18. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by RoLi · · Score: 1
      The govt will probably still keep MS office at the edge of its structure so asto work in with everyone else.

      Why should they? Telling citizens to download OO for free is much more friendly and nice than telling them to buy MSO for 455$.

    19. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      I have never thought that Microsoft was a monopoly, but I am glad to see them get a little competition.

      If there is no competition there is a monopoly. If you recognize the lack of options, you implicitly recognize the existence of a monopoly.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
    20. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by Echnin · · Score: 1
      Correct me if I'm wrong, but there have been very few major improvements in word processing technology since they started making the page background white and the text black.
      Well, there is spell checking, synonym/antonym listing, primitive grammar tools... and, of course, Clippy!

      Not a lot of improvements, but synonym listing is one feature that I appreciate very much. I'm sure others can find more.

      --
      Lalala
    21. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by madpierre · · Score: 1

      We distribute documentation and other stuff in pdf or as plain old text.
      Most systems can read those formats.
      Stopped using MS formats ages ago when different versions of Word stopped
      being compatible with each other.

      Got abut 30 workstations in the place, the older ones running Win9x the
      newer ones bought in the last year or so run KDE and OO.

      The older windowboxes will be phased out when they eventually fall to bits.

      --
      siggy played guitar
    22. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by Jason+Earl · · Score: 1

      What's the "edge" in a government department. I would bet that most government workers with a computer end up having some dealings with the general populace. I would bet that documents created for wide disemination will be published in PDF format (or such), but I will also bet that many government workers will be emailing OpenOffice.org formats willy-nilly within a week. The fact that you can download and install OpenOffice.org for free will also make it easier for government employees to simply say "install OpenOffice.org" to people who complain.

      Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't just start handing out CD-R's to folks that complain.

    23. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by Spoing · · Score: 1
      1. I don't see why any business in Isreal should have to change from MS Office to whatever. Just use rtf.

      Tables, indexes, imbedded images. Strange fonts. Odd templates. Macros (occasionally).

      The big problem is that RTF isn't imported/exported the same way for all programs that can use it. It's a horrible mechanism to share files with.

      --
      A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
    24. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Me, I use Wordperfect anyway (because otherwise, I'd have to HURT that paperclip), and Save As .RTF as needed. That way those poor deprived folk who only have M$Word can still read my marvelous writings. ;)

      OTOH, I did have to install OfficeXP on a sacrificial machine, because people who use WordXP apparently never heard of Save As .RTF or some other sane format. :( In fact, I couldn't find *anything* else that WOULD open a WordXP document. Which, of course, is the root of the problem that you mention with M$ locking business into their document formats, and forcing adoption of whatever upgrades will enable everyone to read *this year's* document format.

      Unlike WordPerfect, where every version for the past 10 years defaults to the same document format, and even-older versions (back to 1989, with a free filter) can at least import those files.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    25. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft makes a good product.

      But UNIX has been BETTER for a number of years.

      The word processor/spreadsheet side did 'all it needed to do' back in the Office 95 days.

      And 2 years ago, the word processing/spreadsheet side (for GUI's) on Open Source reached 'all it needed to do'. APPLIX was (is) a very capabile UNIX office suite, and NeXTSTEP had some good software years ago.

      So Microsoft may have 'good' software, but the BETTER UNIX base of Open Source and the ever improving desktop software means the Open Source has passed 'good' along time ago.

      Good VS BETTER. $$$$ VS $0. Even if the $0 is worse in quality, like Wal*Mart killing other distributor shows..... lower cost wins.

      *good as opposed to code written by a 12 year old in BASIC using line numbers.

    26. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Microsoft's 'monopoly' isn't about using it's power to force little guys out of the market

      You're right. Microsoft's monopoly is about driving BIG and SUCCESSFULL guys out of their markets and imposing Microsoft's own lesser products in their place.

      Spreadsheets, word processors, web browsers, media players - all areas where Microsoft was the new guy with the crappy little product and they drove out the big sucessful guys - Lotus, WordPerfect, Netscape, Realplayer, often with illegal tactics.

      Microsoft was caught intentionally putting bugs into the operating system to cause Lotus to crash. There is no way in hell you can argue that intentionally putting bugs into their customer's operating systems is anything but a deliberate attack on their own customers. That is not competing by making a "better and cheaper product". That is making a WORSE product. By making a WORSE operating system they can leverage their OS monopoly to drive their other products. People using Windows could use Lotus's better spreadsheet software and crash, or they could could switch to Microsoft's clunky Excel and not crash. And yes, at the time Excel was a crappy product compared to Lotus. Don't even try to claim IE was better than Netscape when it took half Netscape's marketshare.

      That has been typical of Microsoft's standard operating tactics for many years now. THAT is why Microsoft is hated, for their illegal tactics and for their tactics that intentionally harm their customers. THAT is why monopoly's are bad - because they can get away imposing harmful "features" in their products and can make more money by doing so.

      Microsoft has commited countless such abuses. Just research at Microsoft's conviction for illegally abusing their monopoly for several examples. Illegal contracts, illegal tactics, abuse of monopoly position in one area to create a monopoly in another area. There's also the Java court case - Microsoft violated their contract and intentionally produced a currupted implementation to try to drive out actual Java.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    27. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by vigilology · · Score: 1

      Oh, OK :-)

    28. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by Peaceful_Patriot · · Score: 1

      That's right; the only real showstopper here is in the performance department. It's a pity Linux can run smoothly on a p-166, but when you need an easy-to-use desktop, {kde,gnome}+OOo, raise the bar usually up to 1GHz and up (same for ram).

      Excuse me? I am running a latest linux distro, KDE and OO on an old PII, 266 Mgz, with 180 mb of RAM. It runs great. In fact this is one of the great things about Linux...it loves the old hardware. Why should I go out and buy a new power machine when this one is still working fine? In fact, my 'power machine', running W2K is currently down. Thank God I still have this old laptop.

      --
      There is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
    29. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by GooTi · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, it *can* be run on that. I personally used a p-200/80RAM until a while ago, and everything can indeed be loaded. The problem is, I had to wait almost 3 minutes until OOo could say hello. And with Xft enabled the pain is greater.

      On the same machine, M$ crap (win98+office97) did just fine. I'm talking about loading time and user input response time. Windoze menus seems to be kicked out of the screen when clicked, compared to gnome or kde equivalents. ICEwm and others are snappier, yes, but usually they're not what you setup for end-end-end-users.

    30. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by fastdecade · · Score: 1

      Why should they? Telling citizens to download OO for free is much more friendly and nice than telling them to buy MSO for 455$.

      Yes but supporting both is even nicer. Many of the organisations are converting to Linux/OO for reasons other than the nice price. Likewise, many organisations will stay with MS, for now, despite the price. Why? Training costs, concerns about quality (legit or not), legacy documents, support costs.

      It doesn't matter how valid the arguments are in favour of Linux. The fact remanis that changing OS is a huge step, and many govt "clients" (citizens, companies, etc) will not change in a hurry. Hence, MS will have to be supported for a long time.

    31. Re:Something dangerous to say on /. by RoLi · · Score: 1
      The fact remanis that changing OS is a huge step

      This fact is irrelevant because adding OO to a Windows computer (again irrelevant wether MSO is already installed or not as OO can be installed additionally without any problems) is not a huge step.

  26. We should give all our money to Isreal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anything less would be anti-Semetism.

  27. *offtopic* small problem with windows XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i recently purchased a new hd (WD 120gb) and made a fat32 partition to use as common storage between linux/windows it works fine under linux, it sees it perfectly, it can write to it also, but winXP doesn't seem to like it at all: when i try to access the partition, it insists on formatting it, is there some way to bypass this? (formatting is out of the question) thanks in advance...

    1. Re:*offtopic* small problem with windows XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uhhhh, yah. i think u can do sumthing bout that in the applications folder. try there

    2. Re:*offtopic* small problem with windows XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah...

      How about finally removing XP?

    3. Re:*offtopic* small problem with windows XP by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, convert it to NTFS and use the Linux software that uses XP's ntfs.sys driver to access NTFS partitions. Next stupid offtopic question that could be covered by reading slashdot more often, please.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:*offtopic* small problem with windows XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah...i sure have the space to back up those 100gbs of data, dumbfuck

    5. Re:*offtopic* small problem with windows XP by toddestan · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have found XP and 2000 do not like large FAT32 partitions formatted with other programs, for some odd reason. I had an 80GB drive I wanted to format as FAT32, and I tried a couple of non-MS things and XP and 2000 balked. Finally I installed it in a Windows ME machine and formatted it, and now XP likes it just fine. So if you have access to a 95b/98/ME machine, try that.

  28. +1, Funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right on, dude.

  29. Overrated Mods, please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please. It should be down there with the -1 material. And, anyway, this mate and I bet on the number of mods this post would get, and I need more to win. Help????? Thanks!

  30. How does this effect the Israeli Economy? by DJStealth · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As much as I think its about time someone should stick it to MS and they should be using OSS, I am wondering, how would this effect the Israeli Economy of the Gov't essentially takes $120million out of it in favour of open source. Since MS has an Israeli branch, the money they would spend would stay within the country.

    I guess considering the current government is relatively fiscally socialist (yes, the Likud gov't is more to the left than most people think) they could probably find better use for the money such as education, health care or other emergency medical services that are unfortunately needed due to the recent situation.

    1. Re:How does this effect the Israeli Economy? by DAldredge · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Do you have any proof that the money would stay in Israel? More than likely the profits would go back to Microsoft Corp in Washington state.

    2. Re:How does this effect the Israeli Economy? by burns210 · · Score: 1

      why not then pump 100 million into local software companies for contracts like custom distro, patched software, custom software, or custom work on the kernel/bug fixes?

    3. Re:How does this effect the Israeli Economy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they can then go and blow up even some more power grids in occupied palestine and make sure that palestine remains the example for americans in baghdad to follow.

    4. Re:How does this effect the Israeli Economy? by Linus+Sixpack · · Score: 1

      Thats the Irony about Software for BIG clients. These very large amounts could write a lot of software the governments could own or give away. True, there would be false starts, corruption, mistakes etc... but its still a LOT of money. I think this is ultimately the pay off of a moral stance on software. Governments have a resposibility to literacy, computers are the new literacy. Just like governments give out books they should give out software whenever possible. The GPL makes it very likely that what gets developed is distributed with little expensive management or strategy. The patronage of the government(s) basically create a marketing free zone. I think this translates into a lot of money available for coding. All it takes is a couple of successful projects a year and Open source could walk through the markets reflecting the government will with democratic software. 120 million thats a lot of money to develope a system that writes memos, even with Hebrew Characters, -- especially when the project rests on the available work of others and is designed to contribute to future projects. ls

    5. Re:How does this effect the Israeli Economy? by RoLi · · Score: 1
      Since MS has an Israeli branch, the money they would spend would stay within the country.

      Wrong, about 80% of revenue of Windows and MS Office is profit which goes directly to wallstreet, NY.

      Also there is no programming done in Israel and the branch will have to send money for that back home.

      Most probably less than 10% would stay in Israel.

    6. Re:How does this effect the Israeli Economy? by e.colli · · Score: 0

      Here in Brazil, in the new government with socialist origin, we are having a similar move towards open source.
      I have some things that seems obvious to me, but I have no confidence, yet. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
      I think isn't all about money, but what governance calls "strategy", "technology ownership", "Less economical dependency", etc. and they dislikes monopolies and have some spyware fear.
      As colateral effects, them sight a rising industry with lots of jobs and new oportunities, more tax money and votes.

    7. Re:How does this effect the Israeli Economy? by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      "I guess considering the current government is relatively fiscally socialist (yes, the Likud gov't is more to the left than most people think) they could probably find better use for the money such as education, health care or other emergency medical services that are unfortunately needed due to the recent situation."

      Exactly. That 120 million used to just line Microsoft's bank vaults. Perhaps a bit of it trickled back to the local economy, but rest assured the vast majority of it went directly to Redmond.

      Now the vast majority of it will make it back into the local economy.

    8. Re:How does this effect the Israeli Economy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's keep this in perspective:
      1. the article itself said that this represented only 3-4% of MS Israel's annual revenue. This doesn't constitute a big hit for Microsoft.
      2. This is the Isreali government. Everything they do is paid for by Israeli taxes. Any savings would go back into Israeli pockets but $120 mill doesn't represent much of a dent in Israel's (quick search...) $100 billion dollar GNP.

      The dollars are not what's important here.

  31. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by CrankyFool · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You're quite likely kidding, but it's actually an interesting question.

    We've seen cases before where American aid to Israel was structured in such a way as to encourage it to purchase stuff from America companies rather than do things itself; one example of this was the Galil -- Israel designed and manufactured a pretty damn fine assault rifle, but then found that the money coming from the US was structured such that it was much, much cheaper to just buy M16s.

    Now, mind you, that's probably influenced by the huge brib^H^H^H^Hcontributions defense companies give the government, and I don't think M$ contributes quite *that* much, but we're not very far away from a situation where, say, the next appropriations bill to support Israel has $X million for software purchases from US firms.

    (Oh, and I was born and raised Israeli, have lived in the US since 1985, prefer Unix and am writing this on a WinXP laptop. My loyalties are all over the place :) )

  32. Re:Which is it, Slashdot ? by CoolVibe · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Are you pro-Israel or anti-Israel ?

    Does it matter? Well, if it does, I'd guess most of us are "Israel-neutral".

  33. Re:Hmmm.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, that is NOT funny.

  34. Re:Standing their ground (oops) by ozric99 · · Score: 1

    Ok, so i misread "least" as "last". My only excuse is that I've been at work for 12 hours. ;P

  35. Small government? by wombatmobile · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Israel govt's purchases account for 3-4% of MS Israel's annual revenue.

    3-4% sounds way low. Here in Australia governments account for 30-40% of MS Revenue.

  36. They make SOME good products by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Windows is easy to use, that's true. But other people have made easier to use products before - OS X of course in recent memory, and in the past there have been others..

    Office is OK (I even have Office X for the Mac which I prefer to the PC versions), but frankly although each part of office has a lot of features, I would not call any of them great. For straight-up word processing, I much prefer the version of Wordperfect I used to use in college to Word, any version. And for DTP (where you are trying to position elements exactly) Word is pretty much useless.

    That's the problem lots of people have with Microsoft - Almost all of Microsoft products are simply OK. There are none that I think of that are so nice to use I find them pleasant. There are plenty of non-Microsoft products that I find very pleasant indeed - like Photoshop. And let's talk about Photoshop for a moment - somehow that remains a huge success despite most major graphical file formats (like TIF or JPG) being totally open specs. Word relies heavily on dominance exactly because no-one can exactly get reading/writing Word files correct.

    In other words, Microsoft usually leads based on a strategy of ignorance, whereas other companies (like Adobe) manage to lead through competence.

    In that respect I would disagree with your comment about Microsoft simply producing better and cheaper products being the reason they pull ahead. To some extent this is true, but the missing factor that makes it work is that they use any means possible to make sure everyone is using their stuff and not anyone else's, then by keeping data-interchange fixed to work best in Microsoft products they gain a huge leverage that is almost impossible to overcome. Almost impossible - luckily for everyone the slow adoption rate of various versions of Office has meant there has been time to decode the file format and make other word-processing and office suite options a reality.

    The way for Microsoft to compete would be to give away copies of the latest version of Office for free, essentially hitting the resent button on the market and making everyone have to play file-format catchup again. But even that might not work well as there are still so many people on older versions of the OS that Office does not support, they might not gain traction even if free.

    If Microsoft truly had a product based on quality and price, then Open Office would be no threat. As it is you have an army of users literally chomping at the bit for some other option. How good of a userbase can that be?

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:They make SOME good products by Principal+Skinner · · Score: 1

      you have an army of users literally chomping at the bit

      Man, post links to some pictures of these users! I guess you were speaking figuratively when you said "army", though, which is too bad, because an army of users chomping at the bit would be double cool!

      --
      one hundred twenty
      is just enough characters
      to write a haiku
    2. Re:They make SOME good products by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And for DTP (where you are trying to position elements exactly) Word is pretty much useless.


      Why does everyone try to use word for desktop publishing? It's a very bloated word processor which includes a few desktop publishing features, but it was not meant for that function and, therefore, does it extremely poorly and painfully.

      When I find myself doing desktop publishing types of tasks, I always use software which was meant for it while all of the others around me are using word. I get my work done much more quickly and easily than they do, and I just export it in a common format such as PS or PDF for others to view if it is not destined for hardcopy (which is the usual case).

      I really would like to know why others use word even when they must include graphics, charts, graphs, use columns, wrap text around the aforementioned items, etc. Are people intimidated by desktop publishing software? Is it that nobody has it because it didn't come pre-installed on their computer?
    3. Re:They make SOME good products by jackbird · · Score: 1

      Because for simple tasks where the focus is primarily on content rather than form, DTP software really slows down the workflow.

      If I'm doing a page or 2, sure, I'll lay it out in a real DTP program. For writing/revising my 100+ page course packs with screenshots and illustrations, though, I simply don't have time to edit the text, import to Quark/InDesign, track down the seperately-created illustrations, and then do layout; all to end up with regular text with illustrations.

      The primitive controls in Word 97 are good enough for contrast correction to make screenshots legible, it saves me a lot of time to just copy/paste or PrintScreen from the helpfile/application rather than going through photoshop and tracking filenames, and the Quark lock-in/upgrade treadmill, at least, is even more evil than Office's.

  37. More Israeli Annoyance. heh heh by TaGirl_Keri · · Score: 1

    http://news.dmusic.com/article/9813

    --
    My fav units are dead Mavs
  38. Re: funds SuiCide Corporation by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    Microsoft: *funds SCO lawyers*
    (using intermediaries just like you know who

  39. This isn't about money... by IchBinDasWalross · · Score: 0

    This is about honor. If MS loses the contract with Israel, other nations could fall in a "Domino Effect" and then we'd have a world full of free software and communism.

    --
    Mod "Overrated" instead of replying "I disagree with you," you coward.
  40. Re:A joke! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But they have no issue spending time on their knees, according to frank zappa.

    Cath-o-lick gerls!

  41. 3-4% can't be right by bstadil · · Score: 1
    Israel govt's purchases account for 3-4% of MS Israel's annual revenue.

    There is something wrong with this number. In any western world government expenditure is between 20%-30% of GDP and MS sales as a percent would mirror that. Israel is no exception, probably on the high side because of their elevated security expenses.

    If the number is correct it must exclude the Military and the health sector. What are thhos sectors using? This is a smoke screen of sorts somthing else is going on behind the scene.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
    1. Re:3-4% can't be right by EmCeeHawking · · Score: 1

      In any western world government expenditure is between 20%-30% of GDP

      France is 53%

      Most of Western Europe is not too far behind. If by "western world" you mean only North America, you're closer.

    2. Re:3-4% can't be right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Government expenditures as a share of GDP in the First World, by geographic/cultural zone:

      Former British Empire:

      Australia: 36.0%
      Canada: 40.6%
      Ireland: 34.4%
      New Zealand: 36.5%
      United Kingdom: 40.9%
      United States: 35.6%

      Average: 37.3%

      Germanic Europe:

      Austria: 51.9%
      Belgium: 50.2%
      Germany: 48.6%
      Luxembourg: 46.1%
      Netherlands: 47.3%

      Average: 48.8%

      Latin Europe:

      France: 54.0%
      Italy: 47.7%
      Portugal: 46.1%
      Spain: 39.8%

      Average: 46.9%

      Scandanavia:
      Denmark: 55.3%
      Finland: 49.2%
      Iceland: 44.6%
      Norway: 46.7%
      Sweeden: 58.6%

      Average: 50.9%

      Other:

      Japan: 38.6%
      Switzerland: 39.9%

  42. Re: But its not a great product. by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    We all know Office is not a monopoly because its insanely great.

    Sure some people might think that, but wether or not it is great (its not,) people don't buy the "best".

    They also don't have the "best" marketing. They have a monopoly, years of illegal leverage, and closed data formats--very anti-internet age.

    I remember the pre-monopoly days.

  43. Israel is just the start by Whammy666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not just other goverments, but probably big corporate users as well. Let's face it, Israel is a drop in the bucket in terms of revenue to M$. But if big business decided to follow Israel's lead, M$ could find themselves in a full-scale user revolt. It's not like M$'s licensing, pricing policies and marginal quality hasn't ruffled a few feathers along the way.

    Even worse for M$ is that it would be a high-profile win and an effective endorsement for OSS which could tip the balance for potential OSS users sitting on the fence waiting to see if OSS really does provide a viable alternative to M$.

    --
    When all else fails, run.
    1. Re:Israel is just the start by AstroMage · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If M$ losses the Israeli government as a client, the problem to them will not be that other big clients will immidiately follow, since at first those clients will have no incentive to follow suite.
      The problem will be that, once it chooses OSS, the Israeli government will then give a large push to the translation effort of OSS to Hebrew and to the support of bidi writing. _This_ will enable other Israeli clients to finally move to OSS and will cost M$ a lot in Israel...

    2. Re:Israel is just the start by CodeMaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Israel is not exactly a drop in the bucket. Don't look at sheer mass as an indicator to someones leverage on the market.

      Israel is a highly saturated technology market, and as hebrew is ^H^H was supported exclusively by M$ for it's office suite, any marketshare that M$ losses is crucial to them, as this will mark the beginning of the empires demise...

      Also remember that as the government switches over, then comes the businesses (including their offices in the US and europe, and then the rest of the citizens.

      Nice move, also the work done by IBM, Sun, and the OpenOffice community, and the bidi effort in Mandrake has ought to do the work. Looking forward to a clean cut of M$ off the desktop - not just the Office suite!

  44. Yes by DAldredge · · Score: 1

    Yes, no matter how much the Arab world wishs/teaches/funds the idea that Isreal should be wiped from the face of the planet.

    All Isreal wish to do is protect it's people, why is that so hard for some people to understand?

    1. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are these people worth protecting when they steal and settle on other peoples land? I doubt you would like it if your neighbour decided to move his fence a little over to your side. Or maybe you would... Love thy neighbour.

    2. Re:Yes by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Which side are you talking about? Depending on your point of view it could apply to one/both/none of the sides.

      I am off to bed, you little hitlers enjoy each other.

    3. Re:Yes by unclethursday · · Score: 1
      Are these people worth protecting when they steal and settle on other peoples land?

      I'm sure the native people's of North and South America feel the same way in some respects.

      After all, it's not like the Americas were completely unihabitted when the Europeans came over and stole and settled on the native people's land.

      I'm American, White, and Half Jewish, with only the tiniest bit of Native American Indian (on my mother's side, my fathers grandparents were originally Jews that came from Russia in the 1920's) in me. Except for the tiny tiny bit of me, none of the originators of my family were born on this continent.

      So, if you're American, I ask, are you worth protecting because of how our ancestors stole and settled on the Native American people's land?

      Think about it before answering. America was built on the stealing of land, destruction of the native peoples, and rampant settling. In the eyes of the Zionist Jews, Israel was stolen from them by the non-Jewish people there, after the Roman Empire decided to spread the Jews out all over the world so they wouldn't all be located in what is now Israel. In their eyes, they are only taking back what was stolen from them in the first place.

      The answer to who is more right than the other, in their case, is not for us to decide, especially by Anonymous Cowards on /. Both sides are right in some cases, and both sides are wrong in some cases; and that's about as good as it's going to currently get.

    4. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you little hitlers enjoy each other

      Typically Israeli comments...

      I don't neccesarily agree with the rest of my fellow cowards in this thread, but Israel are not acting responsibly.

      I don't see Israel doing anything to solve the problems with the Palestinians, neither do I see much from the other side.

      Hmmm, perhaps we should extend the fence that Israel is building, to actually fence in the ENTIRE region, Israel and Palestine, and just let you wipe each other off of the face of the earth.

      Neither of you seems to want a solution, if you have to give up an inch.

      Claiming that King David, or whatever his name is, was born there 3000 years ago, and therefore you have the right to destroy Palestinian lives, are stupid.

    5. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Claiming that King David, or whatever his name is, was born there 3000 years ago, and therefore you have the right to destroy Palestinian lives, are stupid.

      And not one bit less stupid than claiming Jews stole Palestinian land, and they therefore have the right to destroy Israeli lives.

    6. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Are these people worth protecting when they steal and settle on other peoples land?

      Typical slashdot ignorance as to what the Israeli public actually is.

      About 20% of Israel consists of Arab Jews kicked out of their own Arab countries after the creation of Israel. This is just like the creation of the Palestinian refugee problem. The difference is that Israel welcomed their borders to Jews, Arab nations didn't welcome their borders to the refugee Arabs, and let them rot in refugee camps.

      Additionally, there has ALWAYS been a Jewish presence in Jerusalem and surrounding Israeli lands. So not all Jews in Israeli are immigrants.

      I doubt you would like it if your neighbour decided to move his fence a little over to your side. You mean moving the fence only after offering to negotiate and even return all occupied land to put the fence on the original border in exchange for peace and recognition? By refusing that offer the Palestinians, Egyptians, and Jordanians effectively said they would continue attacking Israel.

    7. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact the situation is significantly more complex than that, and becomes more complex every time a child dies by either Israeli or "terrorist" hands. In my opinion every single Zionist-Israeli and Anti-Semetic Arab needs to be put over God's knee and given a good hard spanking. They are all a bunch of bratty, insolent children in the eyes of our lord.

  45. Small correction by bstadil · · Score: 1
    at least one machine lying around with OpenOffice.org on it.

    If you had to pay for it, yes that would probably be the mode of operandi, however since it is free it will reside on all machines. Why would you go to another machine, if you could just use your own.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
  46. Yay! by 0x1337 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Yay, a terrorist racist state that sheds no tears for human rights has decided to use Open Source Software, if not for the sake that it doesn't cost any shekels - then for the sake of milking more US dollars out of Microsoft. (Not that I am fan of Microsoft, or anything, lol) I can see whats going to be posted on Slashdot next - 1) Usama bin Laden chooses OSS software. 2) South Korea chooses OSS software over Microsoft. LOL ok... Just because someone chooses OSS, doesn't mean you need to cream your freakin pants over it.

    1. Re:Yay! by bww · · Score: 1, Informative

      its easy to forget about 'human rights' when humans tend to blow themselves up.

    2. Re:Yay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lets not forget the fun ways Israel removed the British from the area... oh let me guess "thats different"

    3. Re:Yay! by 0x1337 · · Score: 1

      Desperate situations provoke desparate acts. If the country you were born in treated you as a 100th class citizen (more like a non-human, an animal) - and bulldozed your home and those of your family and friends - you'd set them up the bomb as well.

    4. Re:Yay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have your order backwards - the reason these people are treated that way is because they are engaging in murdering civilians.

    5. Re:Yay! by mean+pun · · Score: 1
      On the other hand, if your loved ones got killed just because they boarded the wrong bus at the wrong time you'd contemplate bulldozering some houses as well. That doesn't mean it is a good idea.

      The problem with Israel and the Palestinians is that there are two very sad stories: the inhuman treatment of the Palestinians by the Israelis, and the inhuman treatment of the Israelis by the Palestinians. Anyone who ignores the suffering of one of these sides deserves contempt. That goes for fanatics on both sides, and for anyone shouting cheap slogans in favor of one side.

      Wide-eyed idealism? Perhaps, but this mess will only ever get solved when enough people on both sides have the courage to protest against the inhumanities of their own side.

    6. Re:Yay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Not just blowing people up, but blowing themselves up. This is not normal behavior for people who are desperate.

      Tibetans are fighting for an independent state, but they have enough dignity not to blow themselves up. Buddhists believe in non-violence as Martin Luther King did. Unfortunately, this means that the U.N. and the rest of world will ignore their pleas. Only genocidal terrorists are worthy of a state.

      Taiwanese want an independent state, but they don't use suicide bombings.

      The Falun Gong religious sect in China is being oppressed, but they don't fight back with suicide bombs.

      Christians and animists in African countries are persecuted, tortured, and enslaved, but they don't use suicide bombings.

      Even the Irish (IRA) who do employ terrorism in fighting for an independent state, care enough about their own lives not to blow themselves up.

      I'm sure you can think of a lot more examples.

    7. Re:Yay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Desperate situations provoke desparate acts. If the country you were born in treated you as a 100th class citizen (more like a non-human, an animal) - and bulldozed your home and those of your family and friends - you'd set them up the bomb as well.


      I seem to remember something about troops amassing around isreal, then they kicked some ass and took the ground that was occupied by the threatening forces. The spoils of war belong to the victor. The losers who provoked the situation don't get it back just because the war is over. Although they did give back a lot of it.

      For more info, search on the six day war and you'll find pages like this one: http://www.multied.com/Israel/1967SixDayWar.html
    8. Re:Yay! by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      Yeah, nice circle there. How do you plan to break it?

      You have to start somewhere, not breaking UN resolution would be one place.

    9. Re:Yay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So "the spoils of war" include the right to expel the inhabitants of said area, and kill civilians who were not part of the war, but just lived in the area it took plac?

      Pleaasse..

      Btw. spoils of war is so 18. century.

    10. Re:Yay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It goes to show you - the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

      And ironically, if you blow up innocent people, it's looked at as your situation being so desperate you have no other option. Therefore you must get your own state.

    11. Re:Yay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You have to start somewhere, not breaking UN resolution would be one place

      Intersting.

      You mean, the same UN that has 23+ votes due to the Arab League (which formed when Israel was created entirely in opposition to Israel)?

      You mean the 55+ votes of the OIC (Organization of Islamic Countries) that routinely and collectively create legislation against Israel?

      You mean the same UN that had peacekeepers in Egypt beforethe 6 day war, and gladly removed them at Egypt's request before Egypt started amassing troops at the Israeli border?

      The same UN that had peacekeepers on the Israel/Syria border and did nothing when Israelis were kidnapped by hezbollah? And even denied having a video tape of the incident. and after many years admitted to having the videotape and gave it to Israel with the kidnappers faces blurred out?

      The same UN that just passed a proposition demanding human rights for Palestinian children. And then voted down the same proposition demanding human rights for Israeli children?

      The UN is a joke. Something like 15% of all resolutions are aimed at Israel. 50+ votes are controlled by countries hostile to Israel. UN resolutions are the farthest thing from fair.

    12. Re:Yay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      So "the spoils of war" include the right to expel the inhabitants of said area, and kill civilians who were not part of the war, but just lived in the area it took plac?

      Israel didn't kick out inhavitants of West Bank, Gaza, or Sinai after the 6 Day War. What are you smoking?

    13. Re:Yay! by 0x1337 · · Score: 1

      Care to explain the continued U.S. funding of one of the sides of this holocaust?

      Hey! Maybe if you let them all simmer in their own juices for a while, Ahab the Arab wouldn't want to cast Jihad against the USA.

      Just a thought.

    14. Re:Yay! by stor · · Score: 1

      You have your order backwards - the reason these people are treated that way is because they are engaging in murdering civilians.

      "An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind" --Ghandi

      Cheers
      Stor

      --
      "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
  47. Re:Standard government policy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    No, the analogy would be closer to the reverse. It's pretty tough to dispute the fact that the Palestinians had a very reasonable set of proposals set in front of them back before the Second Intifada began. They turned them down, and furthermore, they pretty much refused to negotiate.


    Now that Israel has a much more hawkish government in place, having realized that the previous tactics failed, you come along and suggest that the Palestinians made an effort to reconcile and Israel refused? I don't get it.


    In fact, the Palestinians I've discussed the issue with agree that Yasser Arafat acted foolishly at the time by not taking advantage of the relative peace and openness to negotiation they had at their disposal. Some have even agreed with me that the Palestinian goverment needs to dispose of an unlimited right of return and focus on getting the more egregious settlements dismantled and agreeing to something that looks similar to the pre-1967 political boundaries, within reason.


    It always amazes me that educated American Palestinians seem much more tolerant and amenable to reasonable discussion of these issues than Europeans and the radical lefties who like to troll on Slashdot. If you have NO idea what you are talking about, please STFU.

  48. A new problem in the roadmap for peace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    George Bush sends an email:
    Attached is a MS Word document stating the new proposed roadmap for peace

    Ariel Sharon Replies:
    NO WORD DOCUMENTS!
    http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word- attachments. html

  49. Re:Which is it, Slashdot ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I fail to see how stealing someone else's land (even if your people suffered horrible acts), and staging premeptive attacks, is self-defense. And for the record, I'm not anti-semetic, or even anti-jewish (lest we forget that most arabs are semetic themselves.) We're all humans in the end.

  50. Do you think that... by Sideshow+Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Microsoft will retalliate by re-inserting swastikas back into their Bookshelf Symbol 7 font

  51. "MS ISRAEL" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Say it with me, "MS ISRAEL". As in subsidiary of Microsoft incorporated in Israel.

  52. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes now thats a really good thing for aid,,
    lets all aid the countries of the world to buy more weapons!

  53. A good deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the last linked article, Microsoft claims "reductions of hundreds of percent," presumably in their software prices. Does this mean that they pay you to use their software? Perhaps I will switch from Linux after all...

    1. Re:A good deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      They probably meant hundredths.

  54. Re:Which is it, Slashdot ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oh right, but when jordan were literaly butchering the palestinians before israel captured that peice of land then it was ok, right?

    When, Israel, one of the most powerful armies in the world, puts it solders in danger because when israel goes into a arab village they go house to house putting thier solders in danger, then it is opression.

    I gotta go fix my dictionary.

  55. When Mr. Gates go home by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1, Funny

    c:> dir
    Friends_with_Israel.DOC
    Deal_with_Devil.DOC
    Dinner_with_Saddam.DOC
    Kiss_Dubya_ass_less_tax.D OC

    c:> delete FRIENDS_WITH_ISRAEL.DOC

    1. Re:When Mr. Gates go home by HillBilly · · Score: 1

      Double click on "My Documents"
      Drag "Friends_with_Israel.DOC" to recycle bin
      right click on recycle bin and select "empty recycle bin"

      --
      "Go into the hall of mirrors and have a bloody hard look at yourself" - HG Nelson
    2. Re:When Mr. Gates go home by Eep!_I'm_a_monkey! · · Score: 1

      Oh we all know its Billy0wnsj00# rm FRIENDS_WITH_ISRAEL.doc Behind closed doors.

  56. Something wicked this way comes by segment · · Score: 0, Troll
    perhaps we've learned some lessons on how to effectively deal with an unethical monopoly.

    We already know they've done their deeds, but the fact remains, corporations allowed them to create this early on. It's much easier for a secretary to open up a silly paper clip and tell her how to print. Can you imagine, or even ponder trying to get millions of them to:

    vi /tmp/report

    pico /tmp/report

    sed 's/error/correction/g' report > revised

    awk '{print $1}' spreadsheet

    Sure there's Open Office and a slew of alternatives, and there is also the cost factor of migrating to an alternative. It would cost billions, and take years. So whether people like it or not, MS isn't going anywhere for some time, and it's only a matter of time before Israel is still going to have to pay the piper via legacy costs.

    1. Re:Something wicked this way comes by ColaMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What a crock of shit. Nobody needs to use vi / pico / sed / awk if they don't want to.

      And frankly, if my secretary needed a silly paper clip to figure out how to print something, they'd be fired, because they sure as hell don't meet my definition of a secretary.

      OpenOffice and Microsoft (hell, the whole "GUI Paradigm" ) all function with the same basic concepts. For most kind of work ( basic spreadsheets / memo's) retraining consists of saying, "The menu's are a little different, but everything's in there, have a bit of a look, knock yourself out."

      For the advanced stuff, it turns out that people who actually do the advanced stuff can normally be retrained fairly easily as well.

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    2. Re:Something wicked this way comes by segment · · Score: 0
      Nobody needs Funny I don't recall stating anyone NEEDS to. What I posted is straightforward. Do you think for one second, corporate Joe Blow from Kokomo gives a rat's ass how something is done as long as it's done? Time is money in business, and no major corporation is going to rush out and migrate thousands of workers over to *Nix for the sake of... For the sake of what?

      Corp. bigwigs want results fast bottom line, and sure there server farms may run AIX, Solaris, HPUX, etc., it wouldn't be economical for them to make some outrageous move. Do the math...

      Training (it will take some time for even the experienced learners to migrate) let's avg this to say a week... A week's salary. Let's lowball that salary to $25k per year, split between say 1000 workers for a decent sized business. $250,000.00 just for training (lowballed) those 'experienced' users. Cost in lost sales, productivity because they're not used to it? I won't go there...

      Now, tech's to migrate those Winboxes over to *Nix. (Those same secretaries...) 1000 boxes at about a half an hour each downtime... (Monies lost not calculated) Tech getting paid (lowballed) 45k per year... 500 hours... Should I go on?

      Get real it's not going to happen at least in this decade. You could bitch all you want but facts are facts, MS won't be going anywhere for a while. Fire the secretary for not knowing. Bring on the next one and sit her in front of KDE, Blackbox, then bitch at her all day because... Because what? She doesn't understand wtf *Nix is? Sure... You'll be running through farms of secretaries there buddy.

    3. Re:Something wicked this way comes by obsid1an · · Score: 1
      Training (it will take some time for even the experienced learners to migrate) let's avg this to say a week... A week's salary. Let's lowball that salary to $25k per year, split between say 1000 workers for a decent sized business. $250,000.00 just for training (lowballed) those 'experienced' users. Cost in lost sales, productivity because they're not used to it? I won't go there...

      Cost of putting MS Office on 1000 boxes - $400,000.00. I'm sorry but no one taught me to use MS Office, and no one taught me to use OpenOffice. It's not that hard. In fact, pretty much everything is the same with a few changes to option placement. Lost sales? Because they changed their office software? Umm, ok. Maybe a small loss in productivity for a short period, but nothing on the scale of hundreds of thousands of dollars like you seem to imply.

    4. Re:Something wicked this way comes by segment · · Score: 0
      Since I have a big mouth, let me put this nail in the coffin before I doze off...

      Tech support this is Microsoft
      versus
      1) /server irc.efnet.net
      2) /j #linuxhelp

      Oh sorry low blow. Maybe links to Freshmeat and Sourceforge should be bookmarked for them too eh? Wait I know... When that really cool program for *nix comes out and the developer gets tired of... developing... Then what? Repeat steps 1 and 2?

      I'm glad I only use MS for recreation, games and music editing (Rebirth), otherwise I stick with Solaris and FreeBSD for Alphas. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see MS pummeled to White Castle status (White Castle cheap rip of McDonalds for those who don't know), but again... It's not going to happen this decade.

    5. Re:Something wicked this way comes by ealar+dlanvuli · · Score: 1

      Funny, I work in an IT department and the only people allowed to call Microsoft are the techs who administer our large scale server deployments that run windows.

      The rest of us don't have anything.

      And "IBM IRC, do you have an existing ticket?"

      I'm sorry, but you're an idiot.

      --
      I live in a giant bucket.
    6. Re:Something wicked this way comes by RoLi · · Score: 1
      What I posted is straightforward.

      What you posted is irrelevant nonsense.

      vi, awk, pico etc. are not used for creating reports and spreadsheets (Just like notepad isn't used for spreadsheets in Windows). Trying to imply that they are makes you just a poor little MS-troll scared seeing his beloved company erode.

    7. Re:Something wicked this way comes by hamster+foo · · Score: 1

      It's probably safe to assume you are just a bit more tech saavy than your average office worker. Changes that seem minor or trivial to the majority of people that read slashdot are things that would very likely throw your average user for a loop.

      --
      - b
    8. Re:Something wicked this way comes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny I don't recall stating anyone NEEDS to. What I posted is straightforward.

      The vi jab was the majority of your post! No it was not straightforeward, and no amount of caplock typing will go back in time to change it no matter how much you realise now it was stupid.

    9. Re:Something wicked this way comes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tech support this is Microsoft
      versus


      Tech support this is Redhat
      versus
      Tech support this is IBM
      versus
      Tech support this is SuSe
      versus
      Tech support this is Sun

      Yeah, I can see how having the total choice of one vendor must be a great advantage, especially when you're on a tight budget and need to shop around for the best deal that meets your requirements.

      I hope you're not in control of any sort of real budget. I'd hate to think of the sort of money you manage to waste by being lazy each month.

    10. Re:Something wicked this way comes by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Informative

      You are correct that the example in the grandparent is a complete crock of shit. However, I feel you are somewhat off base on the issue of retraining, which is a serious issue. In most organizations there are people in place who had a hard time learning office, who would have a hard time relearning for OO.o and who you simply cannot replace for an assortment of reasons, some political, some logistic(al?) Not everything these people do is done on the computer; even when every visible portion of their work IS digital, a significant amount of processing is done in their brain, and not by the PC. If this weren't true, we'd just replace all the people with computers, and they'd do what we tell them. (Which of course is the problem with computers.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:Something wicked this way comes by mAineAc · · Score: 1

      A week's salary. Let's lowball that salary to $25k per year,

      Lowball? Wow, I would love to make 25,000 a year... I think need to move out of Maine.

      mAineAc

    12. Re:Something wicked this way comes by mpe · · Score: 1

      OpenOffice and Microsoft (hell, the whole "GUI Paradigm" ) all function with the same basic concepts. For most kind of work ( basic spreadsheets / memo's) retraining consists of saying, "The menu's are a little different, but everything's in there, have a bit of a look, knock yourself out."

      Which is much the same situation with respect to moving to MS Office 2003.
      IIRC MS Office 97 is the most commonly used. Because for many users it is "feature complete".

    13. Re:Something wicked this way comes by SkimTony · · Score: 1

      To follow up on this, I think it's relevant to point out that sticking with Microsoft will not save you from having to re-train your office administration staff.

      For example, the Mail Merge function (a very popular function with office staff) changed completely between MS Office 2000 and MS Office XP. Our IS department spent a lot of time helping various offices try to make the same merges work in the new system. Likewise, some people find the UI differences between Windows 2000 and Windows XP to be incredibly frustrating.

      If users can accomodate the changes caused by product upgrades from Microsoft, it's not unreasonable for them to accomodate a change to a non-Microsoft system.

  57. Someone misunderstands, badly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Secondly, they have this thing called maturity. Thirdly, most are probably out getting shit faced and laid.

    Cognative Dissonance anyone?

    1. Re:Someone misunderstands, badly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> Secondly, they have this thing called maturity.
      >> Thirdly, most are probably out getting shit faced
      >> and laid.

      > Cognative Dissonance anyone?

      No, thank you. That gets me shit faced... but not laid.

  58. Re:Which is it, Slashdot ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hahahaha! Good one!

    The same way BBC are neutral, right?

  59. What might have clinched it. by Stonent1 · · Score: 1

    I wonder if this has anything to do with the swastikas that accidentally made their way into an MS Office font?

    1. Re:What might have clinched it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be silly! I thought that from the way they are acting, the current Israeli government would approve of the swastikas!

    2. Re:What might have clinched it. by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      It's strange that they (the Israeli Government) hasn't mentioned it then.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  60. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by davew2040 · · Score: 1

    You know what happens if Israel doesn't have weapons? The various Muslim nations next door kill all the Israelis.

  61. That's only insightful if... by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's only insightful if Israel actually ends up buying MS Office. Otherwise the original point (this is just a tactic for Israel to get a price break) is wrong, even if the action (Microsoft offering a lowered price) is the same as your model.

    Basically, I think you jumped the gun a bit to early on proclaiming your prognosticative powers. The time to be smug is when something you predict actually comes to pass.

    Since there are factors at work besides price, i would say Israel is serious and will just keep telling Microsoft to go away.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:That's only insightful if... by johannesg · · Score: 4, Funny
      ...I think you jumped the gun a bit to early...

      Just out of curiosity, is it possible to jump the gun too late?

    2. Re:That's only insightful if... by Ulven · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, but you usually end up with a bullet in you.

    3. Re:That's only insightful if... by madpierre · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In a related thing I read recently in Linux Format #49 (pg 102).

      MS offered a $2000 discount on MSOffice software to Schoolnet Nambia
      only to make them fork out $9000 for Win XP.

      SNNs' director told MS (i'm paraphrasing) to f*** off and is sticking
      with open source software.

      www.linuxformat.co.uk

      --
      siggy played guitar
    4. Re:That's only insightful if... by BJZQ8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly...if you allow Microsoft to give you a low-cost anything, you're just locking yourself into high-cost something else, since it's all Integrated. They'll make their 80% margin somewhere else...

    5. Re:That's only insightful if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry to spoil the party, but I think both of you guys misunderstood the idiom.

      In footraces and the like, a gun is sometimes fired to signal the start of the race. "Jumping the gun" refers to a contestant starting to run before they are allowed to.

    6. Re:That's only insightful if... by baker_tony · · Score: 1

      Must be American. The only use for guns there are for shooting people, aren't they?! :-)

  62. You're misreading by Xtifr · · Score: 1

    It's 3-4% of the total money that Microsoft's Israeli branch ("MS Israel") takes in, not 3-4% of what the gov't of Israel spends.

    > If the number is correct it must exclude the Military and the health sector.

    I don't think MS Israel has a Military or health sector. :)

  63. MOD DOWN OFFTOPIC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nt

  64. Do you know what I love the best? by 0x1337 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Is whenever you "challenge" the official party line, and step on the toes of loudmouth lobby groups who syphon off millions to fund a racist and apartheid state - fellow Slashdot trolls slam you with -infinity "Flaimbait" or "Troll"

    Fucking pathetic.

    1. Re:Do you know what I love the best? by 0x1337 · · Score: 1

      Oh right - I forgot "offtopic." :rolleyes:

  65. Re:Which is it, Slashdot ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Finally one of these Zionists admits that the land was captured, i.e., taken, i.e., seized as the result of military conquest.

  66. "hundreds of percent" off??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Microsoft, it said, "has recently broken its policy of unified pricing of products worldwide. In Thailand and England there were reductions of hundreds of percent" on products that it sells.

    um... wouldn't a reduction of 100% = free? so a reduction of "hundreds of percent" would be even more than free right? so MS has to pay people to use their crap :)
  67. this is funny, not flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mod up funny

  68. Go drive your bus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go drive your bus

  69. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gali fine assault rifle ?

    http://www.kimdutoit.com/dr/weblog.php?id=P1768

  70. USE TeX DAMMIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Word Processors are for wussies. Real men use TeX.

  71. Re:Which is it, Slashdot ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    None of it's right... what world are you living in when any country is always right? I'm just saying that people shouldn't be that surprised or outraged that the Palestinines hate Israel. Image if some guy who's family had been killed because of their race stole your house / apartment, and everyone else simply ignored that fact and called you the asshole for wanting it back.... how would you feel?

  72. Well, there is an army... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    There is an army, but they are not physically contiguous or even in communication. So, a poor army indeed for any kind of real fight!

    If everyone on earth lived only one mile away from Microsoft (say, in very tall towers) and had balconies overlooking Redmond then the army might be quite a bit more concrete and less figurative.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  73. Re:Yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who are the Jews?

  74. It's a matter of opinion and habit. by UPAAntilles · · Score: 1

    Personally, I like Windows XP Professional more than other OSes (such as Linux) because it's so much less work, and there's so much software (*cough* games *cough*) for Windows based systems. I will (and do) use Linux when it comes to things like servers, but for day to day operations, I prefer Windows, ever since DOS 6.1 and Windows 3.11 (though I almost murdered my computer when 95 came out, 98 vindicated MS though IMO). My ultimate point is, compared to those other OSes, Windows is aimed at the 'standard' home computer user. The people that don't really understand much about computers, and just want the confounded thing to work. Windows XP is a wonderful OS for people like that. Plug in a printer, and it works...a digital camera, and the pictures transfer easily, a USB key and it instantly installs the driver and the key appears in My Computer...it's that kind of stuff that makes this a good operating system. Sure, the security in it isn't the best in the business, and the interface could use some work (XP cripples the interface intentionally to protect the computer from the user, I don't like it, but I can see how the general public does), but in the end it's a decent line of OSes, and I haven't minded using it for the past decade or so. (except for trying to install a modem in a DOS system in about '93, that memory still haunts me)

    Actually, I like MS Office. Even 'back in the day' when there were a lot more alternatives, I still liked Office. Lotus 1-2-3 for the Mac was nice, the first PC spreadsheet programs were quaint, but when MS finally got Excel "finished", I was hooked. The key was that it was easier to install/configure/use (Wordperfect came near to grabbing me a couple of times for a word processor, but ultimately lost out). Now, I've tried Open Office, but I just don't like it. I don't really want to get into the nitty-gritty details about it; the MS one is just more intuitive for me (like a QWERTY keyboard over another one, I guess, it's hard to change, even though they can both be effective). And since I get most of my computers through OEMs (Dell), the MS Office's price is not a big turnoff for me. Now, I can see how a government might not like it, having to license thousands upon thousands of copies to upgrade, but I only have a couple, and I'm perfectly content with Office XP (and will be for at least the next couple years). And I would find it easy to believe that the majority of regular computer users agree with me (conjecture, don't attack me on that last sentence pls).

    I also appreciate the air of calm discussion around this and not the 'M$ S|_|XX0RS' '|\|0, MS R0XX0RS!!' that it could have devolved into.

    1. Re:It's a matter of opinion and habit. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      It's important to remember that all of those benefits are present solely because of Microsoft's virtual monopoly on the desktop market. (Obviously, alternatives are available, but Microsoft's ubiquity has traditionally made them not much of an option.) The reason that every printer, scanner, network card and USB backscratcher works with Windows is that it has the overwhelming portion of market share. In order to reach the vast majority of potential users, it is the only operating system vendors must support.

      The great testament to the success of the open source programming model and the quality of Linux in general is that the vast majority of significant hardware is supported by Linux. Certainly there are technical shortcomings, though the arrival of the 2.6.0 kernel (and 2.6.1 which supposedly fixes many things badly broken in 2.6.0, like XFS which panic'd my 2.6.0 kernel) should address most of those - I mention this kernel because it specifically seeks to address certain things which you cite as issues, like digital cameras. Support for USB hotplugging is pretty hosed up in linux 2.4, with hotplug unplug events generally going to null. So yes, there are certainly ways in which Windows is superior, and some of them are even technical.

      I liked Microsoft Office when it was Office 97. Since then it has gotten slower and slower without obvious benefit. I may not be an office power user (I tend to seek alternatives - for example Word is insufficient for desktop publishing, so I use Pagemaker) but I haven't really noticed any significant change in any office app, yet they continue to bump the version and charge users more money. On the other hand, I do like Windows XP but it has many of the same problems that Windows has had since NT4. The merging of memory spaces which formerly were separate has trashed reliability. When the explorer crashes, the majority of your system tray icons are lost, though there is no need for this if the system would run a registry of them which would be preserved through the explosion of explorer. The option to run each explorer process in its own process is no longer available (since IE5) and must be configured with a third party tool. Much of the registry is still inadequately documented.

      Windows has made great strides, but Linux's are greater and Windows should be surpassed in every area but supported hardware in short order. Linux can be made easy for the average user but only a certain subset of hardware will be supported simply because the industry has not supported Linux in the way they have Windows. However, Linux support is now becoming the thing to do, and that benefit will not carry Windows eternally.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  75. Re:Which is it, Slashdot ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    ...puts it solders in danger because when israel goes into a arab village they go house to house putting thier solders in danger...
    Just because you put redundancy in your statements doesn't make them right.
  76. Re:Yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are they gay?

  77. Re:Which is it, Slashdot ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BBC - Better Bullshit Center.

  78. Re:Palestinian viruses attacks... by BTWR · · Score: 2, Informative

    Americans are dying because of the conflict started by your religious fanatics.

    Don't you mean when 7 arab lands invaded ISRAEL the DAY IT WAS CREATED in 1948?

    the stealing of Palestinian lands

    Don't you mean "the arab lands of the West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem fully owned by Arabs (Egypt and Jordan) before 1967, yet they refused to give the Palestinians their own state?"


    C'mon... i admit Israel can be really tough, too tough. And their system of gov't has a LOT that can be corrected, but anyone who says the arabs are not equally if not more responsible is in huge denial...

  79. Re:Yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are they good, or are they whack?
    --or--
    In soviet russia, you are gay.

  80. Microsnot makes a *CHEAPER* product? by GomezAdams · · Score: 0

    When? I must have been sleeping the day M$ dropped their prices. And Good? I just lost another two days of productivity having to get my company laptop re-imaged because Internet Exploder got corrupted while running a non-M$ JVM for an app. And because that piece of crap is part of the OS, I had get a fresh install and am still rebuilding the thing back to where I can support my customers. In the last year I've lost a total of a couple of weeks or more productivity dealing with M$ specific problems. Plus I run about two hours a month doing security scans and adding mandatory patches. At the very high, 3 figure hourly rate I am billed out at, that is not cheaper by any means. And the initial cost is too damn high in the first place.

    I will be so glad when we switch to the Linux desktop and StarOffice or OOo so we can be free from Bill The Bandit and lost time like this. Most of my division's stuff runs on Java and WebSphere anyway so the switch will be easy for us.

    --
    Too lazy to create a sig...
  81. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by CrankyFool · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Yeah, I'm pretty comfortable stating it's a fine assault rifle.

    Note the link you provided mentions one problem with it -- that it's heavy -- and notes the author never actually carried it into combat. AND it notes that people who actually used it have taken the author to task for dogging the Galil.

    (one of my favorite anecdotes to tell about how Israeli military weapons design works differently from US military weapons design goes something like this: One of the problems they were trying to fix when designing the Galil was the more-than-acceptable rate of magazine lips bending in the field, resulting in unreliable feeding. The designers spent some time in the trenches with the soldiers and found out they were using magazine lips as bottle openers, eventually resulting in bending the lips. Solution? They designed the bayonet lug on the Galil so it could be used as a bottle opener.)

    This is going to get modded offtopic, isn't it? :)

  82. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by Malcontent · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hell will freeze over before any politician will grow balls enough to cut funding to Israel.

    --

    War is necrophilia.

  83. Big Clients could write the stuff themselves by Linus+Sixpack · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Thats the Irony about Software for BIG clients. These very large amounts could write a lot of software the governments could own or give away. True, there would be false starts, corruption, mistakes etc... but its still a LOT of money.

    I think this is ultimately the pay off of a moral stance on software. Governments have a resposibility to literacy, computers are the new literacy. Just like governments give out books they should give out software whenever possible.

    The GPL makes it very likely that what gets developed is distributed with little expensive management or strategy. The patronage of the government(s) basically create a marketing free zone. I think this translates into a lot of money available for coding. All it takes is a couple of successful projects a year and Open source could walk through the markets reflecting the government will with democratic software.

    120 million thats a lot of money to develope a system that writes memos, even with Hebrew Characters, -- especially when the project rests on the available work of others and is designed to contribute to future projects.

    ls

  84. It's Munich all over again! by TheMidget · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Just like Munich, Israel shied away from Microsoft not only because of the price, but also in order to avoid vendor lock-in.

    And just like in Munich's case, Microsoft did a counter-proposal that was much cheaper than its normal offering (in the case of Munich, the MSFT proposal ended up being cheaper than the SuSE/IBM/Linux proposal)!

    And just like Munich, Israel still kept sticking with Linux, despite Microsoft's concession on the price!

    Do we see a pattern here? Hint: it's not because of the price. It's because of whatever else Microsoft stands for (vendor lock-in, lack of security, lack of reliability, proprietary interfaces, disregard for consumer and competition, ...)

    1. Re:It's Munich all over again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  85. Re:Which is it, Slashdot ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Please cite examples of BBC bias.

    PS Just because you may not agree with BBC does not necessarily constitute bias.

    Nor do mistakes in reporting constitute bias, unless it can be shown that mistakes are more likely than not biased against one side or another.

  86. It will accelerate by RoLi · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Microsoft has a problem.

    They sell to a saturated market and need to grow earnings to maintain their stock-price.

    Because Microsoft no longer gets new customers, actually they are starting to lose customers, the only way to raise earnings is to squeeze out more of existing customers locked in.

    Their new licensing programme is doing exactly that and is just the start.

    The irony is that only the Microsoft-loyal customers are getting ripped off, while customers who haven't bought into MS-technologies (and run servers on Unix) like for example Munich get huge offers for discounts.

    However with rising licensing costs, the incentive to move away also rises, so I don't think Microsoft can play that game much longer. Very soon their earnings will begin to fall. Either because they lose just too many customers or because they will have no other choice other than to lower prices.

    1. Re:It will accelerate by camiel · · Score: 1

      You're absolutely right. Microsoft will be sandwiched, with on the one hand customers who balk at paying huge fees to Microsoft (customers have better alternatives like OSS) and on the other hand Microsoft stockholders who like to see predictable earnings growth.

    2. Re:It will accelerate by ydrol · · Score: 1
      Because Microsoft no longer gets new customers, actually they are starting to lose customers, the only way to raise earnings is to squeeze out more of existing customers locked in.

      MS Need to move completely to a rental model. Preferably a "low cost" one, as percieved by the end user, so they wont mind being "locked in".

    3. Re:It will accelerate by Peaceful_Patriot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The real risk to MS is if other governments or corporations start to demand seperate Office Components. Despite MS claim that it has always been thier policy to allow this, I have never heard of Office being 'split up' before.

      How many other companies would perfer to buy just Word or Excel or Access or Outlook at a good discount? Probably most organizations don't need everything that comes with Office. I believe this is the real fear with MS. It will be difficult to justify the $400 price tag and If other organizations start demanding this too, their cash cow may suddenly find itself on a diet.

      --
      There is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
    4. Re:It will accelerate by swillden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because Microsoft no longer gets new customers, actually they are starting to lose customers, the only way to raise earnings is to squeeze out more of existing customers locked in.

      Well, there is another way... Given its billions in the bank and its wealth of engineering talent, Microsoft *could* grow by diversifying, innovating (real innovation, not Microsoft's usual form of it), creating new products, finding new ways to *serve* their customers, so that the customers would be happy to give them money, etc.

      When contemplating the above ideas, be careful to keep in mind that you're contemplating some future, changed, Microsoft, an anti-Microsoft, even, that just happens to have possession of the current company's bank accounts and employees. If you don't, you'll end up spraying Coke through your nose and ruin your keyboard. That hurts, I know. And it burns your nasal passages, too.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re:It will accelerate by RoLi · · Score: 1
      Wrong, completely wrong.

      Let's just ignore the fact that Microsoft didn't engineer any of the real revolutionary technologies (like multitasking, virtual memory, managed code or multiprocessing) so they don't have any engineering wealth I can see.

      Anyway, there are few businesses with such huge profit margins as a software-domination (like Windows, MSOffice, Photoshop, AutoCAD, etc.) no matter what business Microsoft chooses, their profitability will suffer.

  87. Re-Read it folks by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    This article says that MS offered what Israel originally wanted. It does not say that Israel has now accepted.

    This is simply a statement from MS. It is possible that Israel will now do something different.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  88. Actually it is catastrophic by RoLi · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Because Microsoft's number one sales argument is that their products are "the standard", everywhere around the world.

    When some regions like Munich and Israel adopt a different standard, their big sales argument starts to tumble.

    Software vendors better jump off .NET because maybe the next generation of customers might want to use non-MS systems or existing customers are located in non-MS regions. Better play it save and use Java or Qt.

    Customers will see big examples of how Linux is a real alternative and is used big time in the real world. That alone (that it can be done) will cost Microsoft billions.

    The constant efforts by MS to be as incompatible as possible will no longer help them and start to hurt them.

    1. Re:Actually it is catastrophic by Dalcius · · Score: 1

      "The constant efforts by MS to be as incompatible as possible will no longer help them and start to hurt them."

      Exactly. In the past, corporations spent all kinds of money working on making the other company's product harder to use. Each tried to leverage their marketshare to get more marketshare.

      With open standards, anyone can join in, meaning more times than not you'll have a significant number of groups making applications which support these standards. This, in effect, makes a monopoly that much harder to create, and makes it all the more difficult for someone to 'embrace and extend' open standards without alienating themselves from the world.

      Now, we've got Microsoft vs. a number of products which all use open standards, like OO.o, AbiWord, Gnumeric, etc. You can use whatever product you like, and you're guaranteed that it will work with other open products. It's the benefit that comes when you don't have lock-in. Most folks these days don't know anything but lockin so they're quite surprised at the idea.

      In the past, companies said "Everyone uses our [closed] format, buy from us." Now it will be said, "Everyone uses our [open] format, use our software."

      It's open lock-in. :)

      Once the Microsoft Office shell is cracked (these last two years saw the first noticable cracks), I think you'll see more of a rush to open standards than anyone is expecting.

      I'll echo what was written in that recent "Linux Predictions" article:
      Look for Microsoft to start advertising open standards compliance.

      I never thought I would say that and believe it myself.

      Cheers

      --
      ~Dalcius
      Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
    2. Re:Actually it is catastrophic by Keeper · · Score: 1

      You've never actually seen a Microsoft sales pitch before, have you?

      Their sales pitches are generally focused around their products allowing you to do more than the competition, faster than the competition, at a lower cost than the competition.

      You may not agree with it, but that's their sales pitch.

  89. To Israel gov. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    In the name of your citizens,
    In the name of your mankind,

    THANK YOU, Israel, for choosing not to deal with Microsoft. THANK YOU, 'cause you opened your eyes.

    Keep up, men, thousands of people are with you that way!

    (PS: To all free software developpers: THANK YOU SO MUCH TOO :))

  90. MS never wanted to support Hebrew on the Mac by trauring · · Score: 1

    There are word processors that handle Hebrew on Mac OS X very well, Mellel (http://www.redlers.com/) for example, so it's clearly possible to do. Apple ships OS X with Hebrew support, including several Hebrew fonts (in the Additional Fonts installation option).

    I've always believed that MS not supporting Hebrew on the Mac was always intended to insure that people don't switch from Windows. They didn't have any agreements like those signed in the US that forced them to support the Mac.

  91. It's dangerous because it's nonsense by RoLi · · Score: 1
    We all deride their security holes, but why do we know about them? (Linux, OS X, and BSD varients have holes too) Hackers target the OSes that the vast majority of computers use. (Why attack 4%, 8%, or 12% when you can attack the 76%?)

    Please explain why CodeRed, CodeRed2 and Nimda (and others) targetted IIS which runs only 20% (and shrinking) share of the market and not Apache which runs 70% (and rising)?

    It's more like that:

    It doesn't matter wether Microsoft's product runs 12% (like MS SQL), 20% (like IIS) or 95% (like Windows), it's always Microsoft's products that get mass-infected.

  92. Some things in life money cant buy... by aardwolf204 · · Score: 4, Funny

    OpenOffice.org: $0

    Some things in life money cant buy, for everything else there's:

    Outlook 2003:....$109.99
    Word 2003:.......$229.99
    Excel 2003:......$229.99
    PowerPoint 2003:.$229.99
    Access 2003:.....$229.99
    Publisher 2003:..$169.99
    Frontpage 2003:..$199.99
    Project 2003:....$599.99
    Total: $1999.92

    --
    Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the /.crowd.May ur days b merry & bright & may al
    1. Re:Some things in life money cant buy... by lewp · · Score: 1

      To be fair, OO.o is comparable to Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. The rest of those programs, while they are part of Microsoft Office, don't really compete with OO.o when split apart.

      Yes, it's still a lot more than $0.

      --
      Game... blouses.
    2. Re:Some things in life money cant buy... by Curtman · · Score: 1

      I don't know about that.. DBA is a lot like Access, and writer/draw have most if not all of the functionality of publisher/frontpage. I'm not sure what exactly Project is, but I doubt there's too many people who would miss it short of a few much disliked suits. Does Office come with a counterpart to OO's Draw program? I honestly don't know, the last Office version I used was Office '98, which had a similar, but much crappier version.

    3. Re:Some things in life money cant buy... by Safety+Cap · · Score: 1
      I'm not sure what exactly Project is, but I doubt there's too many people who would miss it short of a few much disliked suits.
      Project is (unfortunately) the standard for project management software. Most of the unwashed masses of Project Managers (PMs) think that you can fire up Project, plug in some tasks and away you go. Microsoft has done its best to perpetuate this myth, by providing "wizards" to help you set up your project---the irony is that the wizard helps you set up a project the same way four tires and a seat allow you to drive on the street. Project Management is much, much more than a project plan.

      The few seasoned PMs who have been around the block come to realize that Project is a bloated POS that doesn't work well for any type of semi-complicated project (software development, especially), and for a few hundred bucks less you can get the same functionality out of Excel. I will admit that Microsoft has done a great job in improving the app (there's no way in #@$@ that I'd switch from Project 2003 to 2000 or---ugh---98), but it still has a long way to go.

      Project doesn't come with Office, even though Microsoft brands it as part of the office family. To say that only a few suits would miss it is incorrect. Successful IT implementations of any size and/or complexity have to use some elements of Project Management practices, of which MS Project is a part. Those that don't will deliver late, overrun costs by an order of magnitude, and/or fail outright.

      --
      Yeah, right.
    4. Re:Some things in life money cant buy... by Spoing · · Score: 1
      I like OOo, and use it myself on my Linux systems (that would be everything I control minus the old Sun boxes and the AIX system). One friend of mine who like the idea of OOo still complains that it's not perfect yet. He is comming around, though. On one point, you might want to reconsider your thoughts;
      1. I'm not sure what exactly Project is, but I doubt there's too many people who would miss it short of a few much disliked suits.

      It's a project planning tool. Think glorified Gantt charts, (though if you don't know what a Gantt chart is, you might want to take a very few minutes searching and reading so you don't look irrelevent to PHBs).

      MS Project is a fairly good project planning tool, but by no means the best. If you manage projects of moderate size, you need something like it or you will drive yourself nuts.

      My immediate boss uses MS Project and he's not a PHB; he kicks ass. (I'm slowly pulling him into thinking about open source more, though it will take a while; old dogs can be retrained.)

      In good-old-Microsoft style, though, almost nothing reads the files it creates MS Project files. Because of that, I've occasionally had to grab a Windows desktop or VNC into one to use MS Project. I've seen a web-based viewer for MS Project files, though that one is not gratas let alone open, so convincing someone to pay for it is unlikely.

      --
      A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
    5. Re:Some things in life money cant buy... by Curtman · · Score: 1

      Thats pretty much what I figured (and the reason for my suit comment). Thank god I've never had the experience of working in a cube.

    6. Re:Some things in life money cant buy... by aardwolf204 · · Score: 1

      As long as were on the topic of Project Management, I'll take this opportunity to make a shameless plug:

      Visualizing Project Management: A Model for Business and Technical Success (with CD-ROM)
      and
      Communicating Project Management: The Integrated Vocabulary of Project Management and Systems Engineering

      Compliments of Center for Systems Management - Go ahead and /. the site, would make a good case to my PHB why they shouldnt have migrated to ASP from PHP.

      And yes, its a shame that MS Projct is the defacto standard PM PC Tool, and I havent seen any OSS that comes close.

      --
      Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the /.crowd.May ur days b merry & bright & may al
    7. Re:Some things in life money cant buy... by Dredd2Kad · · Score: 1

      For most companies and organizations cost isn't so much a concern. Go ahead...put the mail clerks, office admins, middle managers, directors and executive officers (they are the most comical) in front of a Linux bos with open office...your business will come to a sudden halt. I'm not against OSS, you just have to be real about this....implementing OSS in many places is going to be lime operating a brain tumor...slow and steady steady....and its going to need to mature even more than it has if you expect to see it as a mainstream replacement for MS Office... Lots of obstacles...its not just saving money.

    8. Re:Some things in life money cant buy... by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      Excel project management software? That's news to me.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    9. Re:Some things in life money cant buy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever actually tried openoffice? Anybody who has used Word could use OO immediately for most functions. This is not like the old cli days when you had to memorize a couple of dozen key commands before you could do anything. It is all menus, and they are similar enough to Word to make it very obvious how to do things.

    10. Re:Some things in life money cant buy... by glitch23 · · Score: 1

      You forgot Visio 2003 which is another 400 or so.

      --
      this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
    11. Re:Some things in life money cant buy... by stor · · Score: 1

      And yes, its a shame that MS Projct is the defacto standard PM PC Tool, and I havent seen any OSS that comes close.

      There are a couple. Last time I checked out Mr Project it had a fair way to go but wasn't bad:

      Mr Project

      Toutdoux

      Cheers
      Stor

      --
      "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
    12. Re:Some things in life money cant buy... by stor · · Score: 1

      Excel project management software? That's news to me.

      Oh absolutely. Very common. Works quite well too for small projects at least. Columns=tasks, rows=dates or vice-versa. Use cell background colour to show which staff member is doing what/whatever.

      I actually prefer whipping up a tasklist in a spreadsheet than a Gantt Chart: it's more easily parsed by the majority of people and I can use OpenOffice.org to produce the spreadsheet.

      To many business people Excel is the Swiss Army Knife of applications.

      Cheers
      Stor

      --
      "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
    13. Re:Some things in life money cant buy... by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      Ahh. Yes, I've used Excel myself for small projects like that. But it seemed to be the electronic equivalent of a pen and paper.

      I imagined something more complex, from what you were talking about.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
  93. Complaints by Trillan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Microsoft Head Office has refused to add Hebrew support to Office v.X. Microsoft Israel had offered to foot the localization costs (probably a stupid move), but Microsoft refused them.

    1. Re:Complaints by Drakon · · Score: 2, Informative

      Call me a pedant, but Apple Israel offered to foot the localization costs, not Microsoft Israel, the difference being that releasing the source to a subsidiary is completely different from releasing it to a competitors subsidiary.

    2. Re:Complaints by Spoing · · Score: 1
      1. Call me a pedant, but Apple Israel offered to foot the localization costs, not Microsoft Israel, the difference being that releasing the source to a subsidiary is completely different from releasing it to a competitors subsidiary.

      Did Apple say they would make the changes, or that they would pay MS to make the changes?

      --
      A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
    3. Re:Complaints by Trillan · · Score: 1

      You're correct. My mistake, I was typing too fast or something.

  94. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The exact share of Microsoft revenues that comes from the Israeli government does not matter *that* much. There is a more important thing at stake: which software will use Israeli citizens, business and other bodies that need to cooperate with their government. For instance, Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics and The Bank of Israel distribute information using Microsoft Excel, many other governmental institutions provide documents and forms in Microsoft Word format -- often Microsoft proprietary formats is the only option available. The same goes for local banks tuning their Web sites specifically for Microsoft Internet Explorer, forgetting about other browsers/platforms. It seems like everyone in this country expects people to own Microsoft software, as a matter of course. For this very reason piracy is outrageous here: Office suite costs about 1/3 of average monthly salary and people simply must have it, no matter legally or not. If the government finds an alternative to Microsoft Office, many users will not need it anymore.

  95. I wonder. by Kickasso · · Score: 1

    Why MS keeps not one but two R&D centres in Israel? What are they doing there? Developing optical mice?

  96. Funniest post this week by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come on, mod it up, he deserves it.

  97. Negative costs for software? by frdmfghtr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Microsoft, it said, "has recently broken its policy of unified pricing of products worldwide. In Thailand and England there were reductions of hundreds of percent" on products that it sells.

    Interesting...did MS really pay the Thai and UK governments to use MS products? After all it is pretty hard to reduce the price of anything more than 100%. Heck if MS wants to pay me to use Office, I'll gladly cash that check.

    Now that I think about it, it wouldn't surprise me of MS DID in fact pay the gov'ts to use its products...I'm sure they would receover the costs multiple time over somewhere else.

    --
    Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
    1. Re:Negative costs for software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +3 Interesting? Funny how it wasn't when someone else posted the same thing a few hours before this post.

      Forget RTFA. Read the friggin posts.

  98. Locally developed Hebrew software. by cowbrain_jimbo_ox · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't Israel have its own locally developed brand of Hebrew softwares?
    I wouldn't be surprised at all if they were put out of business by Microsoft long ago.

  99. Question... by qtp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Does anyone know how much the US government spends on Microsoft software every year?

    I've been curious about this for quite some time now, but have been unable to find a budget analysis broken down by vendor.

    --
    Read, L
    1. Re:Question... by qtp · · Score: 1

      Whoever modded this "insightful" is missing the point (although I am thankful for the mod points), as I posted in hopes that someone would be able to provide an answer or, better yet, a link to some sort of documentation that shows either an over all spending by the US govt by vendor or to some individual department (or agency) budgets showing thier spending per vendor.

      I do not know if such documentation is available, and I have not found anything close to this in my studies (I read a lot of government documents).

      What about state budgets? Do any state governments provide publicly viewable per-vendor budget declarations?

      I think that it is reasonable for citizens to request this kind of information, as most taxpayers might like to know who our tax dollars are going to, how much of our tax dollar is spent on administration of the programs, and how much is spent in purchasing agreements for the infrastructure being used to run our governments.

      --
      Read, L
    2. Re:Question... by DF5JT · · Score: 1

      " Does anyone know how much the US government spends on Microsoft software every year?"

      That's irrelevant, because Microsoft is an American company and every product sold by them directly benefits the US economy.

      It's a completely different story with any NON-US entity, since every MS-product sold also directly benefits the US-economy and directly harms this entity's own IT-industry.

      We have a vendor lock-in, no R&D in the country, no nondor-trained staff etc.

      That is the point and that's why every single government in the world is going to switch to non-NS products in the long run, no matter how high the discount.

    3. Re:Question... by mabu · · Score: 1

      It's a completely different story with any NON-US entity, since every MS-product sold also directly benefits the US-economy and directly harms this entity's own IT-industry.


      Oh yea, and these US companies aren't outsourcing work overseas?

      These days, you'd have to look real long and hard to find ANY product which doesn't have at least some foreign-outsourced component within.

    4. Re:Question... by DF5JT · · Score: 1

      "Oh yea, and these US companies aren't outsourcing work overseas?"

      I wasn't talking about US-companies. Please read more carefully.

  100. Re:Your a antisemite!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He sure is. I can't stand anti-semites. Jews are god's chosen people. You can't criticize them just because they did something wrong. It is no different than taking the lord's name in vein. Jews are not responsible for their actions, and that is just the way it is. Don't like it? Then get out of their way, you anti-semite!

  101. well by madpierre · · Score: 1

    My moneys on MOSSAD.
    Bill had better watch his back. :)

    --
    siggy played guitar
  102. Re:Jeepers! (b0rk3d serv3r) by The_Fire_Horse · · Score: 0, Funny

    Dear Sir,
    I have read your post with great interest and I am interested in your views.

    Please subscribe me to your newsletter, as I feel you have a lot to contribute to society.

    Thanks in advance,
    The Fire Horse

  103. Re:Your an antisemite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see you have spotted another one of those wretched creatures. When will these anti-semites learn that god's chosen people are above criticism? Jew's make small mistakes, very rarely, but even then it is not worth insulting god himself by pointing it out.

  104. Hieroglyphs have been available a long time... by Anonymous+Shepard · · Score: 1

    Hieroglyphs have been available in various forms for years, Winglyph (for Windows) for instance, and is indeed used by egyptologists. Nothing new there, no pushing the envelope.

    See e.g.
    http://www.hieroglyphs.net/000501/html/000-048.htm l
    http://www.aegyptisch.de/mdc.html
    (A Google search turns up more links.)

    --
    I have a life. I really do. I've just chosen to ignore it.
  105. The Red Flag of Freedom. by JVStalin · · Score: 0, Troll

    I think Israel should try Red Flag Linux. Perhaps the Red Flag of freedom would inspire them to stop terrorizing Palestineans.

  106. Ay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  107. hmmm by ShadowRage · · Score: 1

    One thing that might happen here is that microsoft might get all pissed off and go to the us government and tell them to cut ties with israel and shit.

    I wouldnt be surprised at all.

    maybe that's a bit extreme, but stranger has happened.

    but good move for israel, %3-%4 doesnt sound like a lot, but it is, in fact, it makes quite a good dent. and once other people see that they dont need to pay for software, microsoft will have red, black and blue asses from all the asskicking they recieve from being boted out of other countries.

  108. Re:Palestinian viruses attacks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Who modded the parent flamebait?

    Since when is presenting actual facts, even as noted by the UN and all other governments, considred flamebait?

    Jeez, does this mean moderators consider any claim other than 'Palestinians are fully innocent, EVERYTHING is Israel's fault' is flamebait?

    Welcome to the new world order.

  109. Oh come on. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you can do it non-destructively, you rude bastard.

    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/using/itp ro /managing/convertfat.asp

    linux, of course, doesn't have very good WRITE support for NTFS.

  110. Re:Which is it, Slashdot ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I fail to see how stealing someone else's land (even if your people suffered horrible acts)

    Which land are you referring to? Land during the war of independence (in which case nothing was stolen)?

    and staging premeptive attacks, is self-defense

    Egypt effectively declared War on Israel, despite having no specific weaponry attacks. THey blockaded the Straits of Tiran, kicked out all UN peacekeepers in the Sinai (which the UN ironically abided by and did nothing afterwards), and massed their modern Soviet-supplied air force on the border. Israel was not in the wrong at all for attacking first. If they didn't they'd be dead.

  111. wahhh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it is flamebait.
    dont whine.

    it's time you israelis and palestinians kissed
    and made up and started making babies together.

    one state !!!

    1. Re:wahhh. by BTWR · · Score: 1

      one state !!!

      One state? So... no Jewish state in what is the area now known as Israel. So that makes it:

      Jewish States: 0
      Arab (Fully Religious Muslim) States: 27

    2. Re:wahhh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dont really get what you are aiming at, do you mean that because there is no jewish state that, the arab muslims should give away their land so that one jewish state can be created? I dont follow that logic...

      And by the way if you look at it, there are allot of christian, non-muslim states why dont they give away some piece of land and make that a jewish state?

    3. Re:wahhh. by BTWR · · Score: 1

      there are allot of christian, non-muslim states why dont they give away some piece of land and make that a jewish state?

      Because the Jews never had a country in ancient Italy or Spain, that's why. And, fyi, the Palestinians were given their own land by the UN (something the Arabs never did for their "brothers"), but they decided to try and steal it all, and lost (and then lost again... and again... and 1 more time after that. Then they suddenly decided to whine to the world how THEIR land was "stolen")...

  112. Re:Which is it, Slashdot ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Please cite examples of BBC bias.

    For one thing, look at the history of the Middle East conflict on BBC. Every single thing there has an anti-Israel bias.

    For example, the 6 day war in 1967. It sums it up in a few sentences saying Israel attacked and seized Sinai, Gaza, and West Bank. It makes it look like Israel's fault. It says NOTHING about all the actions Egypt, Jordan, and Syria did prior to that (including legally declaring war on Israel by blockading the Straits of Tiran to Israeli vessels). Israel was justified in it's attack.

    Also there's NO mention of how right after the war Israel offered to return ALL occupied lands in exchange for peace and recognition. This offer was refused with the famous 3 NO's : No negotiations, No peace, No recognition.

    Another example. Look at their occasional opinion summaries on the middle-east conflict. The only pro-Israel opinions they ever show there are far-right op-eds by right-wing fundamentalists thereby making the pro-Israel crowd look like racists. They don't include op-eds (of which there are many, including Jerusalem Post and Haaretz Daily which they usually quote) that are reasonable and centrist.

  113. I wonder how far will MS go by danila · · Score: 2, Funny

    From the article:
    Microsoft, it said, "has recently broken its policy of unified pricing of products worldwide. In Thailand and England there were reductions of hundreds of percent" on products that it sells.
    I want a two hundred percent reduction in price too!

    --
    Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
  114. Its roughly correct by TubeSteak · · Score: 1
    Israel's GDP is estimated at $122 billion and 3~4% of that is 3.66~4.88 billion. If you stay to the lower side, 3~4% of those numbers is around $120 million.

    So to sum it up:
    1. $120 million = revenue from just one piece of MS's Israel operations.
    2. $3~4 billion = total MS sales/licensing in Israel
    3. 3~4% of the Israeli GDP = MS's revenue (money earned w/o accounting for MS expenses)
    4. Profit

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  115. Re:Palestinian viruses attacks... by BTWR · · Score: 1

    Who modded the parent flamebait?

    Don't you know anything? Anything pro-Israel is flamebait on slashdot!

    Since when is presenting actual facts, even as noted by the UN and all other governments, considred flamebait?

    Again, you don't seem to know the Slashdot way. You can only side with the UN when saying things like "Hey Nasi Bush! Get out of Iraq and let the UN run things!" And you only listen to the UN when it serves anti-American or Anti-Israel purposes, like "The UN doesn't recognize this war, so the US sucks!"
    Side note: both of those comments would earn you +5, funny or +5, insightful mods...

    But... when it's pro-Israel or US, you ignore it, and say things like "Just because the UN voted to create a state of Israel, and 7 Arab nations defied that vote and invaded them and lost, that still gives the Jews no right to that land! They stole that land!"

  116. About time a country stands up to MS by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Microsoft isn't the only option out there. They may have the most marketshare, but there are other options out there. Alternatives to Microsoft products exist. About time Microsoft understands this.

    MSOffice is priced too high, Israel understands this. Israel also understands that OpenOffice.org is a lot cheaper and can do much of the same things as MSOffice.

    It also said it would encourage the development of lower-priced alternatives. To that end, it is cooperating with Sun Microsystems (NasdaqNM:SUNW - News) and IBM (NYSE:IBM - News) to design a Hebrew language version of OpenOffice software, a freely distributed open-source alternative to Office.

    OpenOffice.Org should be ported to many different languages if it is to compete with MSOffice. I see this as a bold move to help bring about an alternative to MSOffice that is more affordable. I wonder if certain Software can be called Kosher? :)

    I am reminded of China going with its own version of Linux and trying to develop an alternative to Windows from it. Will more countries get the guts to say "No" to Microsoft and use alternatives or make deals with other companies to create alternatives? I hope so.

    This could be the start of a new trend. A movement away from MS products and towards alternatives like OSS products.

    One factor not mentioned in the articles is Malware, Windows and MSOffice can easily be inflected by Malware but Linux and OpenOffice.Org are not infected by the same Malware. So there is a hidden cost to the TCO, if the Microsoft software gets infected with Malware. Consider a few hours of downtime to scrub the systems of the Malware infected on it.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  117. Well DUH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    looks like a little tough bargaining with Microsoft is all that is needed to get your way. As many predicted after this story, looks like all you have to do is threaten to move to an OSS alternative to make them relent.

    This has come up before.

    A large company (GM was the theory) didn't like the wording of the new license. The License got changed.

    A large company wanted an addl. year of official support for one of the Win9X series. Thus, Microsoft gave it an addl. year.

    Microsoft won't turn its back on lucre.

  118. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Talking to a tank commander the other day, he said the current Israeli tanks are the world's best...even when stacked up against the best from the US and Germany.

  119. This is more a public-relations issue for MS... by Androgynous+Coward · · Score: 1

    Israel is the size of New Jersey (read: 'slightly larger than a Volkswagon Bug'). This means that comparatively the gov't cannot be that large.

    This has to be a saving face issue for MS vs. a revenue loss issue. IBM's (reported) internal drive to get MS off their desktops is probably more of a financial impact with 300k+ employees.

    I imagine we'll see a hefty donation to Israel from Bill Gates shortly for some humanitarian cause. Funny thing is that Israel will probably accept it then go about pursuing Open Source regardless.

  120. Only suckers pay retail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give them a discount and exclude the Arabic language pack and Israel will be pro-M$ in no time. Seriously, how long will it take for M$ to start adopting "religious tolerance" as one of their major "humanitarian" goals?

  121. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by adam613 · · Score: 1

    In the US, it's only the Republicans who are unquestioningly pro-Israel. Almost all Democrats are pro-Palestinian, more than half are anti-Israel, and a couple (Al Sharpton comes to mind) are anti-Semetic.

    If the Republicans don't manage to fix the 2004 elections, there may not BE an Israel for Microsoft to get shafted by for much longer. And once Israel is out of the way, the Muslim extremists will come after the US in much greater force.

  122. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by Coward+Anonymous · · Score: 1

    It's heavy, it rusts, and its accuracy is pathetic because the sights jiggle all over the place.

    I carried it for 3 years and it is a dog. Gimme an M-16 any day.

  123. Joe's Adult Fun Emporium... by qtp · · Score: 1

    because Microsoft is an American company and every product sold by them directly benefits the US economy.

    By your reasoning, if congress was spending $.60 of every $1.00 at Joe's Adult Fun Emporium, it would be perfectly OK, as "Joe's" is an American company, and every dollar spent there goes back into the American economy.

    While I do agree that it is better for our govt to spend money on products and services from American suppliers rather than sending that money overseas to foriegn companies, I still believe that it is reasonable too as how and where our tax dollars are being spent.

    --
    Read, L
  124. "Microsoft Jewed Down by Israel." by dankjones · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Would have been a much funnier title.

  125. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by Malcontent · · Score: 1

    Bulshit.

    Sharpton may be an exception but not one of the democratic candidates have said anything bad about Israel. They are all fighting for the same pool of jewish votes. Not even Hillary (your most hated woman) has critized Israel.

    The republican discovered their love is Israel last election cycle. Before that they were all about cutting off foreign aid.

    BTW how would the muslimg destroy a country with over 200 nuclear weapons?

    --

    War is necrophilia.

  126. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by swillden · · Score: 1

    We've seen cases before where American aid to Israel was structured in such a way as to encourage it to purchase stuff from America companies rather than do things itself

    You may not have meant it this way, but this sentence makes it sound as though the arrangement is somehow disguised.

    It's not hidden or obscure at all. Here's how it works: If the Israeli Ministry of Defense buys equipment that is at least 50% US-made, then they get to spend the US military aid money on it. If the equipment is 49% or less US-made, they have to pay for it themselves. The specific rules that define what percentage of a given product is from the US are very complex, of course -- it's a very complex question -- but it's all very open.

    "Structured to encourage" sounds rather shady, even if it ultimately means the same thing as "You can only spend our money if you spend it with us".

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  127. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do NOT criticize Israel. Please look the other way.

  128. TCO breakdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Someone posted this earlier. Here it is Microsoft, here is your fucking TCO comparison chart.
    OpenOffice.org: $0
    Some things in life money cant buy, for everything else there's:
    Outlook 2003:....$109.99
    Word 2003:.......$229.99
    Excel 2003:......$229.99
    PowerPoint 2003:.$229.99
    Access 2003:.....$229.99
    Publisher 2003:..$169.99
    Frontpage 2003:..$199.99
    Project 2003:....$599.99
    Total: $1999.92

  129. Common guys... by moshiko · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How did this become an israel pro and against debate?
    This about a strategic move one of the governments of the world took.
    BTW, they financed the localization of open office, and still got it cheaper the ms office.
    It's about money, not religion or political views.
    Please stick to the point.
    The israeli arab conflict is an important issue, but it doesn't really concern microsoft...

    --
    I love burekas in the morning
  130. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anti-semite! Anti-semite!

  131. Puppets? by CAB · · Score: 1

    How many Israelies are not jewish?
    How many jews in the american finance (i.e. all the banks) and business sector?

    How long before someone will begin to pull the strings attached to the Israeli government?

    How long will the "rebellion" be ignored?

    This is neither anti nor pro-anything, including religions or countries... merely a question towards the obvious.

    --
    Best regards,
    Steen Suder
    -- for email: send to .net
    1. Re:Puppets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is assuming that jews or even israel is a unified body. If you knew anything about jews, youd know that jews and unified dont go together. There is especially no unification between the american and israeli jews, there is no hostility, but israeli jews can care less what american jews think of them or do (well I am exagerating, but I am talking about a general sense).

  132. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are all fighting for the same pool of jewish votes

    Which is lessthan 2% of the population. see here -- I dont understand why Isreal/Jews get so much attention....

  133. Re:How is Windows easier to use than Linux? by Rutulian · · Score: 1

    but MS Word sometimes has problems opening its documents... nice effort, but I'll stick with my M$, thanks

    Hmmm...you know, I bet these people don't actually pay to use M$. I can't think of very many people I know who would keep using Office if they had to pay for it. As long as they can "borrow" somebody's cd, yes, they will continue to use Office. If, however, they were offered the choice of $450 or free + a few glitches, I am willing to bet they would go for the latter.

  134. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by adam613 · · Score: 1

    The Jews get so much attention because they are much more than 2% of the population of states like CA and NY, and they vote in much greater proportion than the population at large. The voting population of a place like Manhattan is probably closer to 15% Jewish, and 15% of a voting population is worthy of attention.

    Israel gets so much attention because the religious Christians know what will happen to their holy sites if the Palestinians control it, and the Christian right has a stranglehold on the US government.

  135. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not so much the tanks as the crews.

  136. Has to be said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So it sounds like they, er, "Jewed them down"?

  137. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by Malcontent · · Score: 1

    Because they are organized, vote monolithicly, give contributions to politicians.

    Same with unions, doctors, lawyers etc. If you can organize yourself, get people out to vote and give campaign contributions then you get attention.

    --

    War is necrophilia.

  138. What about compliance on open standards? by PeteQC · · Score: 1

    I do believe that every governments in the world are putting themselves at great risks by choose MS Office for 1 reason: MSOffice format (.doc, .xls) is NOT A STANDARD!!

    What's the big deal?

    Well, in a few year you could end up with a ton of official documents locked in a format you won't be able to read without MS product! That's a big risk for a government.

    Yes, as of today, a lot of companies (including OpenOffice) breaked the MS format in a decent (but not perfect) way. But what in a couple of years from now? They may well complicate their format a lot.

    That's a big reason why government NEED to switch to something like StarOffice or OpenOffice because the file format is PUBLISHED, AVAILABLE FOR ALL. So they won't be locked in with MS products!

    --
    Montreal - Best city to live in!
  139. why dont they? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why dont they just load a bunch of rockets into an attack chopper and blast the shit out of something that belongs to microsoft? Is that not how isreal treats people that dont deal with them?

  140. ISSOFT by coyotedata · · Score: 1

    Israel is giving away afree OS to anyone - it is a copycat of Windows

  141. Re: But its not a great product. by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    beep beep.
    no passing the buss when the stop sign is out.

  142. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They have done it before.

  143. Re:The Right. The Drama(TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IBM and Sun are US companies.

  144. Supporting Israel Is Bipartisan by superyooser · · Score: 1
    Almost all Democrats are pro-Palestinian

    Adam, please watch what you say. Let's not turn this into a partisan issue.

    First of all, you have to make a big distinction between Democrat politicians and rank-and-file Democrats as of late. As far as Congress goes, being pro-Israel is a bipartisan stance, and we need to keep it that way. Both Republican and Democrat Congressmen have long records of being pro-Israel. If you go around accusing Democrats of being anti-Israel, it may become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

    The trend in the American left today is to take the opposite stance of your political opponents, even if it disagrees with your principles! That's why you see Democrats bashing Bush for being an extreme conservative even though he has given them a completely liberal domestic agenda. They feel like they have to bash whatever Bush does simply because he's a Republican. If Republicans support Israel and accuse Democrats of not supporting Israel, it may produce a polarization over time and Democrats may start opposing it because it's a "Republican issue."

    We need to speak carefully. This is an issue Republicans and Democrats honestly agree on. There should be no division on supporting Israel. Let's acknowledge and affirm each other's efforts. For example, Congress has declared at least twice that Israel's capital should be Jerusalem instead of Tel Aviv. And an undivided Jerusalem to boot, which includes eastern Jerusalem - part of the PA-occupied "West Bank." The sentiment is supported overwhelmingly by both parties. Yet, among Israeli politicians today, the idea of officially annexing eastern Jerusalem and making the whole city the capital is considered to be so hard-line right-wing, or just diplomatically infeasible, that's it's almost never discussed. Conservative Israelis lament that our Congress is more Zionist than their Knesset.

    Howard Dean, Al Sharpton, and their supporters are indeed anti-Israel or even pro-P.A., but current Democrat office holders, with few exceptions, support Israel pretty solidly. We should not provoke them into taking the opposite side to oppose us.