Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Denies Sabotaging Mandriva Linux PC Deal
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft has denied sabotaging Mandriva's deal with the Nigerian government to supply Classmate PCs from Intel along with a customized Mandriva Linux operating system. 'From Microsoft's perspective it's a matter of choice. In the statement sent to InternetNews.com, Microsoft said it believes individuals, governments and other organizations should be free to choose the software and other technologies that best meet their needs. "We are seeing strong market demand for Windows on low-cost devices to help governments in the areas of education, local innovation, and jobs and opportunity," the Microsoft spokesperson said in the statement.' The company's denial is in response to Mandriva's CEO Francois Bancilhon expression of disappointment with Microsoft."
"Microsoft said it believes individuals, governments and other organizations should be free to choose the software and other technologies that best meet their needs"
That choice is Vista Basic, Vista Home Premium, Vista Business, Vista Ultimate. Microsoft will do anything to make sure that they get a stronghold in emerging markets, they don't care what's best for the user (of course sometimes windows is the best option, doesn't mean it is all the time)
Well, they can't afford for whole countries to escape the Windows hegemony.. It makes "business sense" for Microsoft to 'gift' or 'donate' whole slews of Windows licenses to a government to keep them in the fold. So then everyone else will need Microsoft to interoperate with them.
Their whole argument of "people should be free to choose the best software for the task" is a little tongue in cheek. After all, the initial procurement was probably far more lengthy and in depth than the quick 'jerk' reaction to taking MS on board afterwards. They did probably buy what was best for their requirements in the first place.
It would be interesting to see what laws on software dumping are present in Nigeria (not many, I'd estimate), so yes, they're obeying Nigerian law. Not necessarily the law as applies to the country that any given reader may be in.
So, they can happily state that while engaging in business practices that are illegal in countries other than the one they are making that transaction.
This kind of U turn (and added expenditure, if obeying the normal laws of the Western World) is not really possible without "greasing the wheels"..
Smoke and mirrors once again, Microsoft.
I suppose by "their needs" they mean "Microsoft's needs". And the government has money and power, the people don't.
Cmon, for a PR persn,that is effectivly an admission of guilt, with a statement of "too bad, it is not illegal" tacked on.
"Microsoft has denied sabotaging Mandriva's deal with the Nigerian government..."
Then why is the Nigerian Government still paying Mandriva for the contract they was happy with (and still appear to be happy with it)? This is so obviously MS bunging them money AFTER they lost the fight, and telling them "Here you are, here is a few million to get rid of that and install Windows - we will pay for the loss".
I've been reading the comments here and the comments on the previous article, and I'm surprised to see something missing.
Show of hands:
1. Who knows that Nigeria is an oil producing nation?
2. Who knows the Nigerian people see barely a thin dime of the money?
The government of Nigeria has shown itself to be easily corrupted at the expense of the people. See wikipedia and read the part about the government. It's not hard to imagine something crooked going on with this.
Any word on how M$ is going to avoid massive amounts of pirating of software by unleashing their steaming pile of OS on a 3rd world nation? Or do they just assume that everybody there will pirate the stuff anyway so they just want to "sell" a few licenses in the process?
I've seen cases like this before in the hardware business. Not very often, but it does happen occasionally. After a long hard sales cycle, Neal Nanotech decides to buy something from that hot new startup, Tyrell Corpration. The sales team from Cyberdyne Systems decides that they can't afford to lose NN as a customer, since they'll lose not only future sales and the income from the maintenance contract, but Tyrell will be able to use NN as a refernce in future ad campaigns. So, there's one last big push to a Senior VP, the President, or even the CEO. Typically, Cyberdyne offers a trade-in allowance for all of the Tyrell product at NN's full purchase price, while discounting Cyberdyne's prduct just enough to equal the trade-in. This way, NN isn't out any money (at least not initially) while Cyberdyne avoids violations of any anti-dumping laws. Cyberdyne then sends the brand-new Tyrell products straight to the recycling center. (Or maybe they resell it on eBay, with a good long offer period. "Look here, Mr. Potential Customer! How good can Tyrell's product be if people are dumping unopened boxes of it on eBay?")
Nothing for 6-digit uids?
1. Union Carbide
2. Monsanto
3. British East India Company. Well, not exactly modern, but known.
Chat with other atheists http://secularchat.org
How many companies out there care for what's "best for the user" if it doesn't involve their products?
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!