"Don't you realize that you are pissing off customers such as myself!"
How?
Apple has a contract with a supplier of their parts. The supplier was selling these parts unauthorized to other parties, and this was against a pre-arranged agreement with apple. They didn't sue any end-users, they didn't hurt anyone, they merely told a supplier they have violated a contract clause and thus the supplier pulled itself into line.
Im confused why everyone's angry at apple, what did they do wrong?
"If I were an Apple customer and wanted to buy a cheaper, better alternative to a Mac, I'd disagree with you."
Yeah, buy a PC, its a cheaper, better alternative.
Apple aren't stopping you from buying any computer you want. They're stopping you from buying unauthorized Mac's, which is THEIR product.
I cannot understand how you came to the conclusion Apple are monopolistic, after they are just trying to control THEIR OWN line of products.
Disclaimer : I do not use any apple products, as i believe they are shit.
You're correct, as the bill itself states, in part 17(a) -
" A public authority must, in making a decision about the procurement of computer software for its operations, have regard to the principle that, wherever practicable, a public authority should use open source software in preference to proprietary software"
The writer, in his statement, expresses that the relative cheapness, flexibility and the robustness and secureness of open source products is why they should be preferred, due to their source being available freely for inspection. I find it interesting to note that the ISC is urging choice, yet the bill states that they are choosing software, not about what tool is best for the job at hand, but what tool best serves the government's needs in the long run, including cost-effectiveness and security.
In the Bill itself, its seems to be addressing "Mr President". Im unsure of whom this bill is being proposed too, but if its a Parliament bill, wouldn't it be addressed to Mr Speaker or Mr Premier?
Secondly, this ISC mob seem to be pro choice, as long as that choice is from a commercial product. From the article -
"...look to the competitive software market to acquire the best solution for a given need."
From their members page, i can see a few more noticeable companies, including Microsoft, yet I cannot identify any open-source companies.
Not too much "choice" there, i think.
Slashdot Mirror
"Don't you realize that you are pissing off customers such as myself!"
How?
Apple has a contract with a supplier of their parts. The supplier was selling these parts unauthorized to other parties, and this was against a pre-arranged agreement with apple. They didn't sue any end-users, they didn't hurt anyone, they merely told a supplier they have violated a contract clause and thus the supplier pulled itself into line.
Im confused why everyone's angry at apple, what did they do wrong?
(Yes i realized you were mainly having a joke.)
"If I were an Apple customer and wanted to buy a cheaper, better alternative to a Mac, I'd disagree with you." Yeah, buy a PC, its a cheaper, better alternative. Apple aren't stopping you from buying any computer you want. They're stopping you from buying unauthorized Mac's, which is THEIR product. I cannot understand how you came to the conclusion Apple are monopolistic, after they are just trying to control THEIR OWN line of products. Disclaimer : I do not use any apple products, as i believe they are shit.
Unless Cnet has inside knowledge about CmdrTaco's fetishes, its not a real article.
I know about the Democrats, but I was unaware about the Two - House system of SA (as I live in QLD, where there is only 1).
Thanks for clearing that up for me.
Correct me if im wrong, but how is the parent offtopic?
You're correct, as the bill itself states, in part 17(a) -
" A public authority must, in making a decision about the procurement of computer software for its operations, have regard to the principle that, wherever practicable, a public authority should use open source software in preference to proprietary software"
The writer, in his statement, expresses that the relative cheapness, flexibility and the robustness and secureness of open source products is why they should be preferred, due to their source being available freely for inspection. I find it interesting to note that the ISC is urging choice, yet the bill states that they are choosing software, not about what tool is best for the job at hand, but what tool best serves the government's needs in the long run, including cost-effectiveness and security.
In the Bill itself, its seems to be addressing "Mr President". Im unsure of whom this bill is being proposed too, but if its a Parliament bill, wouldn't it be addressed to Mr Speaker or Mr Premier?
Secondly, this ISC mob seem to be pro choice, as long as that choice is from a commercial product. From the article -
"...look to the competitive software market to acquire the best solution for a given need."
From their members page, i can see a few more noticeable companies, including Microsoft, yet I cannot identify any open-source companies. Not too much "choice" there, i think.