Europe: Time running out for Microsoft

TalkBack 46 of 125:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

And another win - pow!

"Now you are quoting me chopped up and left stuff out.
You are a piece of work. You need to provide links to your
claims because following you is too much of a chore. The
links you are providing I have bookmarked."

Again with no examples hoping the reader will believe at
face value the lie.

Just how are you bookmarking my links when you accuse
me of not providing any?

"Well it did break it. What did you expect from total
removal? Technical problem MS warned them it would
break functionability in the first place. Including the DOJ."

The MS remedy did, but it wasn't the EC that demanded it
(your claim). The EC ruling was quite clearly the opposite
(are you ever going to read it, link in my first post), and in
the end MS appears to have come-up with a solution the EC
agrees with.

"Like I said you didn't like the link from MS's site. They are
under the microscope. They are not lying. You need
repeating to. Don't worry, I will not repeat it again."

I love the link from the MS site. It does absolutely nothing
to support your case, in fact the opposite it supports mine.
Where does it point out that MS was forced, by the EC, to
remove anything breaking other apps? It doesn't because it
didn't happen - YOUR CLAIMS ARE WRONG.

"But the EC didn't say that. Just Carlo Piana did. Just
because Samba is broke doesn't make it MS's problem. Also
if the license cannot work with the GPL, too bad. It could
with modules from MS. Then they would claim them too
expensive. We know how you guys operate."

And you have a go at me about quoting? You don't even
quote something to give context.

Carlo Piana didn't say anything your claiming - his quotes
are printed in the article and none of them claim open
source couldn't afford the MS license, but the terms were
incompatible. See he agrees with ME not YOU - you are
again WRONG.

It is not "too bad" if the terms don't agree with the GPL as
the ruling states the terms must be compatible with all
interest parties (READ THE RULING). This is too bad for MS.

"Did you read the rest of the article where MS will provide
them interoperability at a reduced cost. Discounts dude.
But not free. Still cherry picking the sentences."

Big deal? The discount doesn't matter if the terms are
incompatible - my point all along (thanks again).

"I know about the fine they already paid. When is the $5
million a day going to kick in. We are past the deadline.
Maybe the EC didn't realize the technical problems would
be greater than they thought."

Now its "maybe" - the EC is giving MS every
opportunity to comply with the ruling but have warned that
their patience is limited. They want to increase competition,
and they are going about it in a sensible manner.

"If the GPL cannot work with commercial software or MS's
they have to part company. MS doesn't owe the GPL squat."

Hello? Hello? It is not about MS owing the GPL, but abiding
by a ruling that is in place because of past and continuing
illegal antitrust behaviour. It is punishment!

"When the EC ordered them out the first time. MS removed
the WMP library. EC realized they went too far and ordered
MS to put some back. They are always changing. Now you
know why the government shouldn't program."

Now you've developed a time-line in your head of what
happened. Again you have zero proof of any of this, YOU
ARE MAKING IT UP!

"It has always been about the money. Those who don't have
it do not provide jobs or pay taxes and have a little or no
voice. The EC is not going to trash a taxpayer like MS or
IBM for the likes of the GPL."

Perhaps in your world of greed and payoff. We'll see.

"I introduced material that you refuse to quote correctly.
But then you don't quote me correctly either. Everything is
out of context. I guess everything is a lie unless it comes
out of a linux publication. With you it is a waste of time."

Where? I'm at a lost to understand your position. My
responses have been almost line for line. My quotes have
been from the very article you've linked to. Even your links
to non-linux publication prove my point not yours. Keep
looking for that elusive victory:-)

Posted by: Richard Flude   Posted on: 05/16/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Email Security and Archiving - Clearer in the Cloud Google The time is NOW for businesses and organizations of all sizes to implement ... Download Now
• The True Costs of Virtual Server Solutions VMware In an economic environment that is repeatedly heralding the message "do ... Download Now
• Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now