Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
Cor Nouws a écrit :
Alexandro Colorado wrote:
There was a post on digg explaining what it was actually found and
how did Balmer distorted the news in true Microsoft way:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1729908,00.asp
Interesting, but Nov. 2004.
Is this about the same claim(s) ?
Huh, there might have been a problem in the dates, because this article
is supposed to have been published a few days ago...
Hmm, all references lead to pages in august / november 2004.
Which doesn't mean that the content is less valid...
just my question: Is this about the same claim(s) ?
--
Cor Nouws
Arnhem - Netherlands
nl.OpenOffice.org - marketing contact
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
