In article <[email protected]>,
"amicus_curious" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> There are several things wrong with your notion, I think. The first being
> that Microsoft is somehow not "allowing" other companies to be "less timid"
> about possible Linux offerings. It is a myth widely held amongst the Linux
> fans, I know, but there is absolutely nothing that Microsoft is doing to
> overtly prevent such a thing. Indeed, there is a direct agreement with the
> US DOJ that nothing in that regard shall be done as part of the overall
> settlement of the USA vs Microsoft case in the late 1990s. An oversight
> committee is in place to make sure. Do you think they are asleep at the
> switch? You probably do, but you are wrong.
Might be prepared to believe these assertions, despite deeply
ingrained skepticism re anything to do with Microsoft, if it
weren't for the idiocy of this following sentence:
> Nor is the economy helped by lowering the cost of goods sold in commerce.
If Microsoft is forced to lower its (monopolistically enhanced)
prices, and as a result many of their customers have some of
their money left to spend on other goods and services, you're
saying that that _hurts_ the economy?!?!?
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
