On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 16:34 -0500, "Ed Leafe" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Feb 16, 2011, at 4:21 PM, Jarvis, Matthew > > > That's what previous highly-publicized switches back to Windows were > like: lots of vague, hard-to-believe claims that reinforced the stereotypical > objection to Linux from a decade ago. > > That's why I'm curious to see if this instance is another case of > Microsoft throwing lots of $$ behind the scene to them to get them to switch, > and then having them issue a bunch of lame, contrived reasons to the public > as the reason for the switch.
I would be of the opinion that they could well have hit roadblocks like they say. Also the workforce are probably unionised up the wazoo and very change resistant and no doubt they will be getting XP and the rest at a bargain basement price. But I doubt there is any payola. -- Alan Bourke alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
