I think you've got it all wrong here. Microsoft would stand to make a lot more money if it secretly started causing cancer, then they could get kick-backs from the us medical system for extra business. Then, when the medical system fails, Office XP Cancer Edition will be used to treat the then trademarked MS Cancer. What a plan! Who needs a hospital when you've got MS Cancer.
ok, let me get this straight. You would not run apple on a server because it is bsd and open source. Then, by the same token, you would also not run linux on a server. But, on the other hand, you would run windows and other microsoft products because they are closed source and have no outside developers. I'm not quite sure of the understanding behind here, because we all know that the core BSD code is not junk, not written by incompetent programmers (imo) and stable enough to be run in most environments. And best of all, its not Windows.
Well, perhaps Microsoft is a bad example because they do farm out a lot of technology work to outside consulting firms, which may or may not hire incompetent monkeys and or midgets to do their work.
I think that i'll continue to run the risk of supporting bsd/*nix instead of putting my life on the line with windows (which for the record, i think their luna interface needs some work).
Perhaps some of the larger players, ie. a few certain companies that have had oh so public problems with their dns, could throw some support behind the cause. We can fork until the cows come home but without proper planning and support, in the end we'll be back to square one.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you've got it all wrong here. Microsoft would stand to make a lot more money if it secretly started causing cancer, then they could get kick-backs from the us medical system for extra business. Then, when the medical system fails, Office XP Cancer Edition will be used to treat the then trademarked MS Cancer. What a plan! Who needs a hospital when you've got MS Cancer.
ok, let me get this straight. You would not run apple on a server because it is bsd and open source. Then, by the same token, you would also not run linux on a server. But, on the other hand, you would run windows and other microsoft products because they are closed source and have no outside developers. I'm not quite sure of the understanding behind here, because we all know that the core BSD code is not junk, not written by incompetent programmers (imo) and stable enough to be run in most environments. And best of all, its not Windows.
Well, perhaps Microsoft is a bad example because they do farm out a lot of technology work to outside consulting firms, which may or may not hire incompetent monkeys and or midgets to do their work.
I think that i'll continue to run the risk of supporting bsd/*nix instead of putting my life on the line with windows (which for the record, i think their luna interface needs some work).
Perhaps some of the larger players, ie. a few certain companies that have had oh so public problems with their dns, could throw some support behind the cause. We can fork until the cows come home but without proper planning and support, in the end we'll be back to square one.