Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Ties $235m IT Aid To Use of Windows
E5Rebel writes "Microsoft will spend $235m in schools worldwide over the next five years, part of a plan to
triple the number of students and teachers trained in its software programs to up to 270 million by 2013. 'Microsoft's investment shows how important it views developing markets to its future business. Last year, Microsoft introduced the Student Innovation Suite, which includes the XP Starter Edition plus educational applications, for $3 for qualifying countries. Microsoft faces heated competition from companies supporting the open-source OS Linux and associated software in developing countries. "I think as a company we welcome choice," [Orlando Ayala] said. "Frankly, we welcome the competition." The company's educational funding comes with a hitch: "Of course, that includes the fact they [the schools] use Windows," Ayala said.' If you don't use Windows you don't get the cash." Microsoft has long been interested in the education of children.
it's where they get all their best ideas!
(calm down modders - it's just a joke)
This isn't aid, its a subsidy to grow the Windows market. Aid would be focused on the end-goal of the people, not on the end-goal of the company.
This is a blatant case of a monopoly subsidising to establish itself in emerging markets.
The NYT has a page that is still up
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
I saw something similar to this this weekend as I was riding a bus to NYC. A billboard in Delaware or some other state said "FREE $50 When You Join!" referring to a casino membership. But in very fine print (hilariously fine for the size of the billboard) it said, "Money must be spent inside the casino within a half hour of joining." I remember thinking to myself, that sure is free.
How free is something when you're told what to spend it on? How free is money when it goes into a fund that invests in the United States companies and stock markets and you can't control that fund?
My answer would be 'not very' but, you know, when you see these 'donations' from the rich like Bill Gates, that seems to be the case every single time. I'm glad they're getting something, I'm upset about the strings attached. Better than nothing, yes. But sounding more and more like a fishy tax loophole or legacy purchase (he'll go down in history as a philanthropist no doubt) every day.
My work here is dung.
It looks like they are giving free software and support valued at the overinflated prices Microsoft gets for there product. Using this metric, Ubuntu is also donating $235 million to schools, students, businesses and people. (Support via Ubuntu Forums)
Why is it a surprise they would only fund free training for their own software? I mean isnt that kind of a duh thing? Are linux companies sinister too now because they dont pay for free windows training for people who dont buy linux?
Isn't this pretty similar to what Apple was doing with schools back in the 80's?
Can I mod an article -1 Troll?
...Microsoft to pay for future customers.
;)
Which means they would have to increase prices for their software, which makes more people decide to use the free open source alternatives instead.
I just love it when a plan comes together.
muhahahahaha!!!
In 10 grants contingent on recipients of said aid only use it to purchase special Educational Grant Editions of my Ubuntu clone at a cost of $600,000,000,000 a piece. That way, I'm donating a huge amount, but I don't actually have to donate a penny (unless I'm off by a decimal place there).
On a more serious level, I could donate $1,000,000 to schools that could only be used to buy licenses of my slightly modified Ubuntu clone and never have to spend money - if they don't buy my licenses, they don't get the money; if they do buy my Ubuntu clone, I get the money back and maybe have to eat the cost of some CD-Rs.
"Donating" money that can only be used to purchase an intangible good (and software, other than the physical media, is intangible) from yourself is like donating nothing - especially when you're donating to people who wouldn't buy your product if it weren't being given to them.
Microsoft faces heated competition from companies supporting the open-source OS Linux and associated software in developing countries.
Microsoft isn't confronting competition in these targeted regions, they're confronting rampant piracy of their OS. They figure it's better to get $3.00 per copy than nothing.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
I seem to remember that along with using an existing monopoly to leverage one of the illegal sides of monopoly is the concept of predatory pricing, i.e. deliberately pricing a product well below it's market value in order to strike down a competitor.
With the cost of Windows as it is, "giving" software to schools along with a condition that they must be using Windows is about as predatory as you can get. What's the EU's phone number again?
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
[
More like giving the homeless guy drugs when he needs food, knowing that he'll come back to you for the next hit. They're "developing markets to their future business."
Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors!
I am reminded of that Simpson's episode with the Oscar Myer periodic chart with "bolognium" and "delicium."
I think schools should turn this msft "gift" down. There is nothing that msft is offering, that does not have a free alternative.
I am sure a lot of people will label me a linux zealot. But the truth is, I completely understand that linux is not for everybody. But schools are a different matter. Schools should teach vendor-neutral concepts. Students should not be taught that vendor specific jargon and standards are somehow universal. For example, what msft calls a "domain" is different than what is commonly understood. I already notice a lot of students thinking that anything non-msft is non-standard.
Unlike commercial institutions, students do not have the same concerns about the acceptance of vendor specific document formats. For example, some accountants will only accept Intuit formated income statements - so some small businesses have to use Intuit, but students should be able to learn the concepts of accounting, and accounting concepts, without being tied to a specific vendor.
Again, I want to emphasize: students should be taught *concepts* then those concepts can be applied to software from any vendor. Schools should not be in the business of promoting a particular vendor - especially if that vendor does not offer anything that is that freely available anyway.
Sometimes it is very difficult to avoid vendor-lock, but for students, it's easy. So why be vendor locked if you don't have to be?