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."
Troll? Oh come on now, that is funny!
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
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.
MoFscker
I think Israel should try Red Flag Linux. Perhaps the Red Flag of freedom would inspire them to stop terrorizing Palestineans.
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