" So you think that having skirmishes with Iraq for the next 50 years won't kill anyone?"
Why have skirmishes at all?
"Bash Bush all you want but at least some good came out of the war (Saddam is gone)"
Sure it gor rid of saddam but that too came with a price.
First of all the Iraqis have now lost control of their most important natural resource which is oil. They will never be able to join OPEC, they will never be able to control their production to maximize the price of oil (and therefore maximize their profit). Their oil production will be calibrated to provide the cheapest oil possible for the US and to offset production cuts by OPEC. This is a heavy price to pay.
Secondly they have now permanently lost a percentage of their country to america. According to runsfeld the US will set up at least a half dozen permanent military bases in Iraq.
finally even though they now have more freedom then they did before they still don't have the same degree of freedom as the rest of the world. They can only elect leaders we approve of, those leaders can only implement policies we approve of.
Of course it will take years before they are even allowed to vote in a general election so that last point is kind of moot.
"They did nothing but destroy infrastructure and kill people."
Oh right our invasion didn't kill anybody or destroy infrastructure. Not to worry though friends of bush now have fat contracts to rebuild the country though.
"And you're a fool if you think those goverments didn't need changing. The people wanted it. We wanted it."
It's not our job. If they wanted to change it they should have done it themselves. The russians did it, the cheks did it, the east germans did it, the polish did it. Any way what good did it do to them anyway. Now they will get a choice between US puppet A and US puppet B. I am sure they are happy about that.
"By the time they reach a consensus and turn off their system, the battle will be over, possibly with lots of allied casualties."
What allies? The us will act unilaterally anyway. Sure we had "allies" like jamaica and somalia but they didn't actually do anything did they?
Also consider that US has a very stange concept of an ally. Our allies are only allies as long as they don't disagree. France went from being an ally to being an enemy in less then a month.
Europe now realizes that America is no friend or ally to anybody. It will never ever put the interests of any other country above it's own. We can and will declare war on europe if it feels it's own interests are threatened in any way.
"End result of the US decision to invade ? Thousands of Iraqi civilians dead (not to count tens of thousands of Iraqi army personnel), no WMDs found and the chances of terrorist attacks have increased as people see the US as invading and subjugating another muslim country."
Yes but we control the oil wells so our primary objective has been met. Most americans are more then glad to kill tens of thousands of arabs if the price of gas goes down 25 cents.
"Note that I'm no fan of the current US administration, but to suggest that creating a European version of GPS is some great step towards making the EU a 'relevant' force in world politics (by which I mean a force capable of doing ~anything~) seems a tad laughable."
Go ahead and laugh if you want. Every step is significant and this is an important step.
Too bad the europeans are not smart enough to take the most important step of all and that is to STOP BUYING AMERICAN PRODUCTS. If they stop buying american products, stop watching american movies, stop listening to american music then they will impact the economy which will weaken the US.
"Unless you want to imply that the USmilitary is going to attack europe to stop them from lauching its satelittes..."
Why not? Look how fast france went from being one of closest allies to our number one enemy. You think george bush would have any reservations about invading france? You think the amrican public would object to invading france? Who would stop us?
We can and will shoot their sattelites down, we can and will bomb the shit out of anybody who stand in the way of total american domination of the world. That's the wolofowitz doctorine go read it.
The UN was created to prevent war. It was created so that strong countried could not invade and occupy weaker countries and take over their natural resources.
It failed miserably and now is irrelevant.
If the UN is unable to prevent strong countries from invading and occupying weaker countries then what good is it?
You are way too much of an optomist. The US now controls all of the world and the second largest oil supply in the world. We can kill whoever we want whenever we want. We can invade any country in the world are gleeful about doing so.
To top it all off we worship the military like a cult. This kind of worship of the military and power can only lead to more violence.
Yes thank god we stopped that saddam from invading germany and china. Why if it wasn't for us iraq would have taken over the world just like you say. Don't let the fact that they didn't have an air force, nuklear weapons or missiles that couldn't go further then a few hundred miles fool you. Despite continual bombing by the US for 20 years saddam was poised to TAKE OVER THE WORLD.
George Bush was a brave man for standing up to the most powerful dictator in the world. If he didn't stand up to him we would all be speaking arabic right now.
Right, so we should just fine them $30B so that it's more "fair""
It would be a more just punishment then they got. If you don't want to fine them then break them apart so that it's impossible for them to subsidize non monoploy products with monopoly profits.
"First off, MS can't just "dump" money into the XBox. This will piss off shareholders because it's their money that's being dumped, and MS is liable. "
This is patently false. A handful of people control the majority of MS stock. These people all follow Bill Gates like some sort of a messianic figure. None one of the major MS stock holders would for one instant question Bill Gates when it comes to MS strategy.
"Sony has quite a bit of cash, and is not on any financial ropes right now. Sure, they're barely profiting $1B a year, which isn't great considering the size of their company."
Bingo. Sony makes 1 billion per year, Ms has 40 billion in cash. Does that seem like a fair fight? I don't think so.
"And sure, they don't have a monopoly on anything, but so what? MS's monopolies have little relevance for the console industry." It has all the relevance in the world. MS can subsidize money losing products with their monopoly profits.
"It is perfectly legal (and ethical IMHO) for MS to pursue the console industry."
It's illegal do practice "dumping" especially for a monopoly. In this case MS gets away with it because they own the president and the attorney general.
"If this was true, Apple, IBM, Sony, and a slew of other companies would not be in existance."
MS prevented apple from going under by "investing" in them when they desparately needed money. MS did this because they needed a a "competitor" to point to during the trial. Sony will survive but not in any field in which it's competing with MS.
"The fact of the matter is, IBM alone is a much large company than Microsoft, and $40B in cash couldn't even start to buy that company."
IBM survived by getting out of any industry in which MS has a monoply. They shifted their business so that they were not competing with MS.
It's impossible to compete with a monopoly especially MS.
You don't have to go those lengths. Here is what you do. I mean this, this actually works.
Install a PC in the office of the CIO that's running linux or freebsd. Set a screen that shows a penguin or something like that. Install openoffice, set up a handful of programs like mozilla, a jabber client, and make their icons prominent on the destop.
Also install two or three linux servers in the server room. They don't have to be doing anything but it would be great idea to lable them "postgres server" and "Mail Server".
When the time comes to negotiate the new contract the sales rep will notice the servers (they are trained to look for them) and ask about it. At this point the CIO (and not anybody else) says "We are doing some preliminary analysis about the suitablity of a linux desktop and some servers". when the sales drone asks how it's going just say "it's too early to tell but so far it looks pretty good, Hey let's go to the server room and let me show you that new exchange server we installed".
Bingo!. After touring the server room your company will be offered a substantial discount on your software licenses. The bigger you are the bigger the discount.
Paying retail for MS licenses is like paying the sticker price for a car. Only the most stupid idiot CIO will do such a moronic thing.
Bush was asked directly about it. He said "they have the right to say what they want and people have the right not buy their albums" (I am paraphrasing here).
In other words he was backhandedly encouraging the boycott. The man showed no grace, no forgiveness, no class. What the hell kind a president is that?
"So Sony, a multibillion dollar corporation who used it's cash to push Sega out of the industry, and who squashed Nintendo's marketshare, can't compete with MS?"
That's right. Sony does not have a monopoly in anything, Sony does not have 40 billion in cash, sony does not own the president.
In fact sony is on the ropes financially now. Maybe it's temporary I don't know but the strain of competing with MS is already cracking sony apart.
MS is able to kill any company on the planet anytime they want. Bill Gates is the most powerful human being on the plant.
"So let me get this straight. Because they work at Microsoft, the employees are inherintly evil? Greedy? Immoral? Inhuman? All of this because they work for Microsoft?"
Yes. This is a consequence of MS hiring practices. Did you see the thread about the book "moving mount fuji"? In that book it talks about how MS hires people who "think outside the box". What do you think that box is? You and me have innate ideas about good and evil, fair play, honersty, integrity, and the rest of our moral thinking. Ms employees think outside this box. They don't have the same concepts of fair play and morals as you and I do. People who apply to MS and are moral and "good" don't get hired because they don't (can't) break out of their morality box.
"Businesses are tough places out to make money. "
No argument there. Some business make money without without being sleazy though. I wonder how they mange it.
"Microsoft employees are no different than anyone else"
Yes they are different. That's what the whole MS screening process is all about. To seperate out the weak and the timid and the moral.
"The notion that because they work at Microsoft, they're evil is, how shall I say it....fucking moronic."
They are not evil because they work for MS, they work for MS because they are evil.
"Other than them stating their expectations in articles linked to by Slashdot?"
Sources please. Any quote by a MS executive after the release of Xbox does not count.
"For a first entry into the market, that's a fairly ambitious goal against two very well entrenched competitors."
It would be if it was any other company in the world. MS is not any other company. Their cash reserves are more then most companies revenues.
"Microsoft may be vicious in the business world, but that by no means makes them idiots"
Microsoft is not only vicious but also immoral and unethical. MS employees are not bound by the same ethical and moral standards you and I are. This is one of the side effects of hiring people who think "outside the box". Those people don't have the same concept of good and evil as you and me. Of course they are not stupid. They are very smart people.
Smart and evil people don't ever think of setting goals for themselves that entail 20% of the market.
BTW the Xbox is not designed to beat PS/2. It's designed to lock the consumer into other MS products and to force people to buy MS only games, MS only movies, MS only music etc. MS can not do this without a 90+ percent market share in Xbox. An Xbox which fails to get a monopoly is failure for MS. Without that monopoly they will not be able to force people to buy MS media.
" Nintendo's gotten along just fine selling to small portion of the market. Apple's another fine example of a niche market."
You said it. Xbox is a niche market in game consoles.
" Xbox has exceeded MS's hopes for the first iteration of the system."
First of all you have no way of knowing what their expectations are. I doubt very much that the biggest, richest most powerful computing company headed by the worlds richect man, with 40 billion dollars in the bank and a worlwide monopoly in the desktop market set 20% as their market penetration goal.
By MS standards they failed miserably in this field. I don't think there is one person inside MS saying that 20% "exceeded our expectations".
Because 20% doesn't count for shit in that industry. Nobody wants to write games for 20% of the market just like hardawre manufacturers don't want to drive drivers for linux.
Slashdot Mirror
" So you think that having skirmishes with Iraq for the next 50 years won't kill anyone?"
Why have skirmishes at all?
"Bash Bush all you want but at least some good came out of the war (Saddam is gone)"
Sure it gor rid of saddam but that too came with a price.
First of all the Iraqis have now lost control of their most important natural resource which is oil. They will never be able to join OPEC, they will never be able to control their production to maximize the price of oil (and therefore maximize their profit). Their oil production will be calibrated to provide the cheapest oil possible for the US and to offset production cuts by OPEC. This is a heavy price to pay.
Secondly they have now permanently lost a percentage of their country to america. According to runsfeld the US will set up at least a half dozen permanent military bases in Iraq.
finally even though they now have more freedom then they did before they still don't have the same degree of freedom as the rest of the world. They can only elect leaders we approve of, those leaders can only implement policies we approve of.
Of course it will take years before they are even allowed to vote in a general election so that last point is kind of moot.
"They did nothing but destroy infrastructure and kill people."
Oh right our invasion didn't kill anybody or destroy infrastructure. Not to worry though friends of bush now have fat contracts to rebuild the country though.
"And you're a fool if you think those goverments didn't need changing. The people wanted it. We wanted it."
It's not our job. If they wanted to change it they should have done it themselves. The russians did it, the cheks did it, the east germans did it, the polish did it. Any way what good did it do to them anyway. Now they will get a choice between US puppet A and US puppet B. I am sure they are happy about that.
" The U.S. doesn't really give a damn about the rest of the world, just that part of it which crashes airplanes into our skyscrapers."
Huh? Did iraq or afghanistan crash those planes? Did syria or iran?
Oh I think I know what you mean. You mean it was arabs and therefore all arabs are our enemy.
" Until it's used to attack the U.S. At that point, it will cease to exist."
I think we will kill the europeans way before they get a notion to attack us. We loves to kill!
"By the time they reach a consensus and turn off their system, the battle will be over, possibly with lots of allied casualties."
What allies? The us will act unilaterally anyway. Sure we had "allies" like jamaica and somalia but they didn't actually do anything did they?
Also consider that US has a very stange concept of an ally. Our allies are only allies as long as they don't disagree. France went from being an ally to being an enemy in less then a month.
Europe now realizes that America is no friend or ally to anybody. It will never ever put the interests of any other country above it's own. We can and will declare war on europe if it feels it's own interests are threatened in any way.
"End result of the US decision to invade ? Thousands of Iraqi civilians dead (not to count tens of thousands of Iraqi army personnel), no WMDs found and the chances of terrorist attacks have increased as people see the US as invading and subjugating another muslim country."
Yes but we control the oil wells so our primary objective has been met. Most americans are more then glad to kill tens of thousands of arabs if the price of gas goes down 25 cents.
"Note that I'm no fan of the current US administration, but to suggest that creating a European version of GPS is some great step towards making the EU a 'relevant' force in world politics (by which I mean a force capable of doing ~anything~) seems a tad laughable."
Go ahead and laugh if you want. Every step is significant and this is an important step.
Too bad the europeans are not smart enough to take the most important step of all and that is to STOP BUYING AMERICAN PRODUCTS. If they stop buying american products, stop watching american movies, stop listening to american music then they will impact the economy which will weaken the US.
"Unless you want to imply that the USmilitary is going to attack europe to stop them from lauching its satelittes..."
Why not? Look how fast france went from being one of closest allies to our number one enemy. You think george bush would have any reservations about invading france? You think the amrican public would object to invading france? Who would stop us?
We can and will shoot their sattelites down, we can and will bomb the shit out of anybody who stand in the way of total american domination of the world. That's the wolofowitz doctorine go read it.
Who nellie no fair injecting facts. You are arguing with americans here.
The UN was created to prevent war. It was created so that strong countried could not invade and occupy weaker countries and take over their natural resources.
It failed miserably and now is irrelevant.
If the UN is unable to prevent strong countries from invading and occupying weaker countries then what good is it?
You are way too much of an optomist. The US now controls all of the world and the second largest oil supply in the world. We can kill whoever we want whenever we want. We can invade any country in the world are gleeful about doing so.
To top it all off we worship the military like a cult. This kind of worship of the military and power can only lead to more violence.
Yes thank god we stopped that saddam from invading germany and china. Why if it wasn't for us iraq would have taken over the world just like you say. Don't let the fact that they didn't have an air force, nuklear weapons or missiles that couldn't go further then a few hundred miles fool you. Despite continual bombing by the US for 20 years saddam was poised to TAKE OVER THE WORLD.
George Bush was a brave man for standing up to the most powerful dictator in the world. If he didn't stand up to him we would all be speaking arabic right now.
DO you think shooting other countries sattelites would be considered an act of war?
Are you prepared to go to war with europe?
Right, so we should just fine them $30B so that it's more "fair""
It would be a more just punishment then they got. If you don't want to fine them then break them apart so that it's impossible for them to subsidize non monoploy products with monopoly profits.
"First off, MS can't just "dump" money into the XBox. This will piss off shareholders because it's their money that's being dumped, and MS is liable. "
This is patently false. A handful of people control the majority of MS stock. These people all follow Bill Gates like some sort of a messianic figure. None one of the major MS stock holders would for one instant question Bill Gates when it comes to MS strategy.
"Sony has quite a bit of cash, and is not on any financial ropes right now. Sure, they're barely profiting $1B a year, which isn't great considering the size of their company."
Bingo. Sony makes 1 billion per year, Ms has 40 billion in cash. Does that seem like a fair fight? I don't think so.
"And sure, they don't have a monopoly on anything, but so what? MS's monopolies have little relevance for the console industry."
It has all the relevance in the world. MS can subsidize money losing products with their monopoly profits.
"It is perfectly legal (and ethical IMHO) for MS to pursue the console industry."
It's illegal do practice "dumping" especially for a monopoly. In this case MS gets away with it because they own the president and the attorney general.
"If this was true, Apple, IBM, Sony, and a slew of other companies would not be in existance."
MS prevented apple from going under by "investing" in them when they desparately needed money. MS did this because they needed a a "competitor" to point to during the trial. Sony will survive but not in any field in which it's competing with MS.
"The fact of the matter is, IBM alone is a much large company than Microsoft, and $40B in cash couldn't even start to buy that company."
IBM survived by getting out of any industry in which MS has a monoply. They shifted their business so that they were not competing with MS.
It's impossible to compete with a monopoly especially MS.
You don't have to go those lengths. Here is what you do. I mean this, this actually works.
Install a PC in the office of the CIO that's running linux or freebsd. Set a screen that shows a penguin or something like that. Install openoffice, set up a handful of programs like mozilla, a jabber client, and make their icons prominent on the destop.
Also install two or three linux servers in the server room. They don't have to be doing anything but it would be great idea to lable them "postgres server" and "Mail Server".
When the time comes to negotiate the new contract the sales rep will notice the servers (they are trained to look for them) and ask about it. At this point the CIO (and not anybody else) says "We are doing some preliminary analysis about the suitablity of a linux desktop and some servers". when the sales drone asks how it's going just say "it's too early to tell but so far it looks pretty good, Hey let's go to the server room and let me show you that new exchange server we installed".
Bingo!. After touring the server room your company will be offered a substantial discount on your software licenses. The bigger you are the bigger the discount.
Paying retail for MS licenses is like paying the sticker price for a car. Only the most stupid idiot CIO will do such a moronic thing.
"Would this even be possible?"
Yes. Scientology did it when their tax exempt status was being questioned by the IRS. They filed thousands of suits against the IRS.
The point is not to win the lawsuit, just to file one knowing that you will win by default when they don't show up for court.
You might need all those things to win but not to file.
"reactionary right"
Isn't that the republican party? Or are you talking about other racist facists.
Bush was asked directly about it. He said "they have the right to say what they want and people have the right not buy their albums" (I am paraphrasing here).
In other words he was backhandedly encouraging the boycott. The man showed no grace, no forgiveness, no class. What the hell kind a president is that?
"C'mon, just because you disagree with one particular position of an entity doesn't mean they are allied with MS."
Gartner is not in bed with MS, they are whores. They will get into bed with anybody who pays them.
"So Sony, a multibillion dollar corporation who used it's cash to push Sega out of the industry, and who squashed Nintendo's marketshare, can't compete with MS?"
That's right. Sony does not have a monopoly in anything, Sony does not have 40 billion in cash, sony does not own the president.
In fact sony is on the ropes financially now. Maybe it's temporary I don't know but the strain of competing with MS is already cracking sony apart.
MS is able to kill any company on the planet anytime they want. Bill Gates is the most powerful human being on the plant.
"So let me get this straight. Because they work at Microsoft, the employees are inherintly evil? Greedy? Immoral? Inhuman? All of this because they work for Microsoft?"
Yes. This is a consequence of MS hiring practices. Did you see the thread about the book "moving mount fuji"? In that book it talks about how MS hires people who "think outside the box". What do you think that box is? You and me have innate ideas about good and evil, fair play, honersty, integrity, and the rest of our moral thinking. Ms employees think outside this box. They don't have the same concepts of fair play and morals as you and I do. People who apply to MS and are moral and "good" don't get hired because they don't (can't) break out of their morality box.
"Businesses are tough places out to make money. "
No argument there. Some business make money without without being sleazy though. I wonder how they mange it.
"Microsoft employees are no different than anyone else"
Yes they are different. That's what the whole MS screening process is all about. To seperate out the weak and the timid and the moral.
"The notion that because they work at Microsoft, they're evil is, how shall I say it....fucking moronic."
They are not evil because they work for MS, they work for MS because they are evil.
"Other than them stating their expectations in articles linked to by Slashdot?"
Sources please. Any quote by a MS executive after the release of Xbox does not count.
"For a first entry into the market, that's a fairly ambitious goal against two very well entrenched competitors."
It would be if it was any other company in the world. MS is not any other company. Their cash reserves are more then most companies revenues.
"Microsoft may be vicious in the business world, but that by no means makes them idiots"
Microsoft is not only vicious but also immoral and unethical. MS employees are not bound by the same ethical and moral standards you and I are. This is one of the side effects of hiring people who think "outside the box". Those people don't have the same concept of good and evil as you and me. Of course they are not stupid. They are very smart people.
Smart and evil people don't ever think of setting goals for themselves that entail 20% of the market.
BTW the Xbox is not designed to beat PS/2. It's designed to lock the consumer into other MS products and to force people to buy MS only games, MS only movies, MS only music etc. MS can not do this without a 90+ percent market share in Xbox. An Xbox which fails to get a monopoly is failure for MS. Without that monopoly they will not be able to force people to buy MS media.
"It has to be a balance in the system."
There is a a balance in the system. If you don't like the terms turn the job down.
" Nintendo's gotten along just fine selling to small portion of the market. Apple's another fine example of a niche market."
You said it. Xbox is a niche market in game consoles.
" Xbox has exceeded MS's hopes for the first iteration of the system."
First of all you have no way of knowing what their expectations are. I doubt very much that the biggest, richest most powerful computing company headed by the worlds richect man, with 40 billion dollars in the bank and a worlwide monopoly in the desktop market set 20% as their market penetration goal.
By MS standards they failed miserably in this field. I don't think there is one person inside MS saying that 20% "exceeded our expectations".
Because 20% doesn't count for shit in that industry. Nobody wants to write games for 20% of the market just like hardawre manufacturers don't want to drive drivers for linux.
" Simply put, if you're running Linux on a machine that MS sells with their own OS, you're cheating them out of market share. "
Aren't you also cheating them out of market share if you choose to buy a PS/2 or heaven forbid not buying a game console at all?
When are people going to end up in jail for not buying MS products?