Why is it people with money seem obsessed, they only want more money. It is quite the thing. I learned a little something more about Microsoft recently. If you buy a computer with microsoft system (Windows) already installed, you usually don't get a disk of the system. No biggie, right? Well that may be so but the system does eventually get corrupted. So what are you supposed to do? Buy a "NEW" system of course, from your friendly microsoft dealer. What if you wanted to repair your "old" system?
Why would anyone want to do that you ask, besides not wanting to give Bill Gates another 100 to $200? Because you (I) have hundreds of dollars invested in software and while it is supposed to be 'compatible' that is not always true and often making them so involves a lot of work and expense. It is often easier to just 'upgrade' (i.e. pay more) to get new software. So how many of us really require a word processor that does more than the old "WordStar" from the '70's'? Probably not to many. It is like buying a vehicle that will do 100 miles an hour or a truck that will climb over boulders, the times you use that are probably nil, it is just the thought. So what am I getting at? I bought one of those computers without a 'system' disk. Over time it developed problems so I went out and as the system is getting old I bought a system disk for $5 to restore the system in my computer. Just over write the old corrupted files with the new files, up date the files and a new 'old' system, right? Here is what happens. There is code in the system that won't allow this to happen. So when I tried to upgrade the old system (as in a later release of the originial system) it went into lockdown and wanted a "NEW" code before it would allow the system to be turned back on. A NEW code. The one I bought and paid for years ago would not work, it stated that one was in use. it demands a new one. Just try getting to talk to someone at Microsoft (even if they are in India) about that. Built in obsolesce. Clinton was perusing a law suit against Microsoft for illegal monopoly of the internet but for not even a 6 figure donation to the Bush campaign all they had to do was stall in court until Bush got into office and 'bingo', the suit was dropped. So, what is the big deal? In the late 1800's Dupont had divest itself because they had 60% of the explosives market. In the 50's Xerox had to divest itself because it had 70% of the copy machine market. AT&T in the 80's because they had 80% of the long distance market but Bill Gates can have 98% of the internet market and because he greased the palm of some crooked politician not only does he get to keep it but he can actively pursue getting a greater share even if it means special code in his system software that favors Microsoft products. -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
