At 02:32 AM 7/16/01 +1000, you wrote:
>This is about a *charity* that is giving computers to *poor* people. Chances
>are that these people have hardly ever touched a computer, leave alone owning
>one (no insensitivity intended). Do you think they can afford a copy of
Gotta add to this as this is a subject dear to my heart.
I recall reading/hearing somewhere that these _donated_ computers come from
the donors (typically large companies) with Windblows already
installed. Now I'm not sure of the fine print but haven't the donor
companies _already_ paid for the licence ?
Thus MS is effectively asking for payment twice for the same piece of
software. Most business I know realise that once you have paid for an item
_once_ you own it (case in point : when you buy pavers for your house and
then you sell your house, Boral doesn't expect the new owner to pay for the
pavers a second time).
Couldn't the donor companies just sign a bit of paper saying "donated - one
old computer complete with windows .... installed" ?
Or is M$ a special case ??
Once again M$ have led the field in the ever increasing race to screw
everyone. Starting with the people who can _least_ afford it.
It's a bloody charity.... M$ need to give a little and just say
"naughty. We won't take it any further, if you just stop doing
it". Alternatively they could get a heart and allow the charity to install
win95 on machines that _dont_ come pre-loaded (remember these are old
machines so they probably won't run 2000/XP) subject to a 'cap' of {say}
200 a year.
Alternatively, the charity could be innundated with offers of support from
the linux community asking if they have considered linux / open
office. And pointing out that the support offered by mailing lists is very
good...
Possibly even the local linux users could come and offer to "hand hold"
through the first couple of installs.
Now where was this charity located again ??
