Where do You live? For a corporate entity "just money" is the very meaning of its existence. Their main purpose is to make money not to make software, it just happen so they are making software to make money. So paying for something, and paying for exmaple 5% of their revenue for something is indeed a big issue for them.
I just hope the EU Competition Comission just started to write another billon dollar check payable to compensate Microsoft's prudent corporate citizen behavior.
Hungarian competition commission in 2004 fined major highway constructors for EUR 28.5 million (over USD 35 million) when found evidences of cartel creation in a bidding process. If i remember correctly one of the key evidence they found was a forgotten note on paper in a manager's office. Thats why the raid was needed in the case of MS Hungary. Anticompetitive and illegal activities are rarely well documented by companies.
Well in my opinion the number one argument is to use OOo or SO is by doing so you will be "locked in" to completely open, standardized file formats, that is hands down the best investment protection in the world.
Yeah but in my opinion the biggest problem for them is that linux is outinnovate them by a factor, and they simply cannot keep up. Just take a look the enterprise side it had been a big news in 2000 when Oracle announced linux support, and now? You cannot find any major db vendor without full linux support. On the desktop side just compare Redhat 7.2 with Fedora Core 3. When they will have a proper competition stategy on the datacenter side, the desktop side will began competing heavily (it already had some extent IMHO, just take into account OOo 2, Evo 2, Java and maturing Mono).
Are you serious? In fact the potetial loss rather the control over the dominant client platform. Just think a bit about what you get with proper completely cross platform GUI rendering engine with nice development bindings and wide install base.
Just take a look on this .
As open source application almost always based on/support open standards you should empashize this aspect. The competition of suppliers is the best possible for your organization because it guarantees decreased prices (TCO) and improved quality, and you are able ot rip off another contender if something goes not as good as you expected. Obviously this a less typical option in a closed source MS dominated world where the competition of suppliers is limited. I think every PHB will easily understand these arguments.
I think your picture is somewhat false Marshall Plan wasn't about humanity or respect.
In fact it has been rather a basic momentum of the cold war (effectively it began just when US became the first nuclear superpower). The US were interested in a developed and strong western-europe and japan just to rebalance the soviet sweep in eastern-europe and asia. And to create the new world order the new allies had to be helped every possible way especially wiht lots of money.
Do you think a poor and socially turmoiled europe and japan could stood long against the sweep of communism in the 50's? I think not, and that time that were the most important question and not humanity and respect, pure political interest and some "packaging" of course.
I think global climate change is such an important thing that cannot be leave out of consideration by every individual on Earth. Of course especially who lives in developed countries (the US 4% percent of total population responsible for 25% of total CO emission).
Unfortunately I dont see the knowledge of individual responsibility especially in so called consumer societies. A good example: in the US an average car has a 2+ litre engine and uses lots of unsufficient gas while emitting additional unsufficient CO. Engineers know since a long time to move a car efficiently no more needed than 55 horsepower...
Another thing is the issue of alternative sources only Germany not the whole EU (which comparable to the US) produces more wind power than the US.
So these things makes me really angry and the worst of all is, that all I can do is to writning into this topic.
Slashdot Mirror
Where do You live? For a corporate entity "just money" is the very meaning of its existence. Their main purpose is to make money not to make software, it just happen so they are making software to make money. So paying for something, and paying for exmaple 5% of their revenue for something is indeed a big issue for them.
I just hope the EU Competition Comission just started to write another billon dollar check payable to compensate Microsoft's prudent corporate citizen behavior.
If I were Adobe, I would start to push Linux products out of the door like crazy.
Hungarian competition commission in 2004 fined major highway constructors for EUR 28.5 million (over USD 35 million) when found evidences of cartel creation in a bidding process. If i remember correctly one of the key evidence they found was a forgotten note on paper in a manager's office. Thats why the raid was needed in the case of MS Hungary. Anticompetitive and illegal activities are rarely well documented by companies.
c =3758&m5_lang=en
http://www.gvh.hu/gvh/alpha?do=2&pg=11&st=1&m5_do
Eventually Scott McNeally & Co. got right: The network is the computer.
If I take a quick look on history Microsoft already cooperated with IBM on OS/2 and later with Sun on Java.
And we all know how these cooperations ended.
Well in my opinion the number one argument is to use OOo or SO is by doing so you will be "locked in" to completely open, standardized file formats, that is hands down the best investment protection in the world.
Yeah but in my opinion the biggest problem for them is that linux is outinnovate them by a factor, and they simply cannot keep up. Just take a look the enterprise side it had been a big news in 2000 when Oracle announced linux support, and now? You cannot find any major db vendor without full linux support. On the desktop side just compare Redhat 7.2 with Fedora Core 3. When they will have a proper competition stategy on the datacenter side, the desktop side will began competing heavily (it already had some extent IMHO, just take into account OOo 2, Evo 2, Java and maturing Mono).
Are you serious? In fact the potetial loss rather the control over the dominant client platform. Just think a bit about what you get with proper completely cross platform GUI rendering engine with nice development bindings and wide install base. Just take a look on this .
As open source application almost always based on/support open standards you should empashize this aspect. The competition of suppliers is the best possible for your organization because it guarantees decreased prices (TCO) and improved quality, and you are able ot rip off another contender if something goes not as good as you expected. Obviously this a less typical option in a closed source MS dominated world where the competition of suppliers is limited. I think every PHB will easily understand these arguments.
Do you think shareholders just would simply stand up and claps on that decision?
and John Neumann, we really face with cospiracy done by Hungarian jewish immigrants
Something comaparable from present days (about 7 years ago) Bosnia:
200.000 people killed delibaretly, generally because of ethnical and religious differences.
Is it comparable?
Largest mass murder of all time :)
You didn't read any historical book about the last 3000 years did you.
I think your picture is somewhat false Marshall Plan wasn't about humanity or respect.
In fact it has been rather a basic momentum of the cold war (effectively it began just when US became the first nuclear superpower). The US were interested in a developed and strong western-europe and japan just to rebalance the soviet sweep in eastern-europe and asia. And to create the new world order the new allies had to be helped every possible way especially wiht lots of money.
Do you think a poor and socially turmoiled europe and japan could stood long against the sweep of communism in the 50's? I think not, and that time that were the most important question and not humanity and respect, pure political interest and some "packaging" of course.
I think global climate change is such an important thing that cannot be leave out of consideration by every individual on Earth. Of course especially who lives in developed countries (the US 4% percent of total population responsible for 25% of total CO emission).
Unfortunately I dont see the knowledge of individual responsibility especially in so called consumer societies. A good example: in the US an average car has a 2+ litre engine and uses lots of unsufficient gas while emitting additional unsufficient CO. Engineers know since a long time to move a car efficiently no more needed than 55 horsepower...
Another thing is the issue of alternative sources only Germany not the whole EU (which comparable to the US) produces more wind power than the US.
So these things makes me really angry and the worst of all is, that all I can do is to writning into this topic.
If to make an everyday battery recharger ready for space flight costs (if I remeber well) USD 150.000. Its not very hard to step over your budget...
MS softwares should call "effectively insecure" or something like this. Isn't it?