Microsoft Licensing Fee Intended To Reduce Hobbyists
BokLM writes "Microsoft's Amir Majidimehr, Corporate VP of the Windows Digital Media Division, explained at a DRM conference in London why they require a license fee from device makers." From the article: "According to Amir, the fee is not intended to recoup the expenses Microsoft incurred in developing their DRM, or to turn a profit. The intention is to reduce the number of licensees to a manageable level, to lock out 'hobbyists' and other entities that Microsoft doesn't want to have to trouble itself with."
... but what if my hobby is annoying microsoft?
Considering we're talking about the oh-so-chipper WMA/V format, they should be paying people to have to work with it.
Bury me in mashed potatoes.
Did you know that "Steve Ballmer" is an anagram for "Tremble, slave!". This explains a lot :)
Guess we can add the "War on Cusotmers" (started by the RIAA) to the country's other great successes -- the War on Terror, War on Drugs, and War on Kids on My Lawn
The intention is to reduce the number of licensees to a manageable level, to lock out 'hobbyists' and other entities that Microsoft doesn't want to have to trouble itself with."
*BEEP* *BOP* *BOOP* CHICKACHICKACHICKA *ZIP* *BOOP*
Readout:
We write software! NOT YOU!
I'm reminded of a movie called Revolution OS [revolution-os.com] which enlightened me to Gates' history with hobbyists.
Do you have a Torrent link for that movie? (j/k)
Arguing about vi versus Emacs is like arguing whether it's better to make fire by rubbing sticks or banging rocks.