Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] .NET on the Mac and BSD

[George <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

</snip from the register>
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/28063.html

Gates gives $100m to fight HIV, $421m to fight Linux
By Thomas C Greene in Washington
Posted: 13/11/2002 at 04:22 GMT

We do hate to rain on a high-profile corporate love-fest, but we have to point 
out that in addition to the much trumpeted $100 million Billg has donated to 
India's fight against HIV, he's funding the Microsoft jihad against Linux to 
the far more impressive tune of $421 million. That means that Linux is more 
than four times worse than AIDS to Billg and his happy Redmond family. God 
forbid any of them should learn the bitter truth the hard way and start 
talking sense.

Billg's personal $100 million goes to health initiatives over ten years, while 
$421 million of Microsoft's money goes, over a mere three years, to support 
MS-friendly development and 'educational' initiatives. And being a monster MS 
shareholder himself, a 'Big Win' in India will enrich him personally, perhaps 
well in excess of the $100 million he's donating to the AIDS problem. Makes 
you wonder who the real beneficiary of charity is here.

Oh, and let's not forget the five, count 'em, five, vanity puff-pieces 
appearing in the New York Times this week glorifying Billg's generosity, one 
of which he wrote himself. That's worth quite a lot too, in PR brownie points 
for both him and his company. It's far better than free advertising; it 
actually looks like news and therefore has immensely more persuasive value.

Interestingly, the NYT neglected to mention the gargantuan MS marketing tie-in 
and obvious bribe against, and obstacle to, Linux adoption in India. 
Certainly they've been falling all over Gates in their eagerness to give him 
ink, so we're at a terrible loss to explain why they could find no place, 
among those thousands of words, to plug in a brief mention of the $421 
million in anti-Linux ammo he's delivering.

</End of Snip>

Well Linux is more of a threat than HIV...

George




On Wednesday 13 November 2002 11:49, Mike Miller wrote:
> I think we should be happy for what we are seeing from Microsoft.  They
> are up to their necks in attorneys and a profit culture.  Yet they are
> still handing out their code for free distribution so that it can be
> modified and used in any non-profit way we please.  There must be a strong
> push for open source within the corporation or this wouldn't have
> happened.
>
> I guess I can now see why Microsoft doesn't like GPL -- releasing their
> code under GPL would mean that a competing corporation could take the code
> and use it to gain an advantage over Microsoft (e.g., they could use the
> money they make from selling a Microsoft GPL product to sue Microsoft over
> some unrelated issue).  Microsoft doesn't want that to happen.  So they
> have a license that allows only *non-profit* uses of their code.  GPL
> would allow *for-profit* uses.
>
> I think most of us should like the .NET license just fine.  It gives us
> the code.  We just can't use it to make money.  Is that so bad?
>
> It would be a little ironic to hear proponents of a free and open system
> condemning Microsoft for blocking them from selling software for profit!
>
> Mike



--
To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php

Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/