
Gates Book and DOJ Trial Contradictions 28
Veralden writes
"Here is a story about Gates and another MS witness
contradicting on how their sales data is recorded.
According to Gates, they have sales results in digital
form and a witness testified that they have paper sales
records. MS denies this, but the article seems to take a
more objective view. "
Here is
the story.
Can You Say "Perjury"? (Score:1)
As noted in the article, this probably won't
have much, if any, impact on the trial. But
one has to wonder at Gates' and Microsoft's
arrogance.
Here they are, in an "IT Trial of the Century",
the odds-makers are probably quoting odds heavily
against Microsoft, and Gates authors a book
with statements that *directly* contradict, or
at least call into question--the testimony of
one of their primary defense witnesses?
Hello?
And that oh-so-believable statement from MS
spokesperson Mark Murray, "explaining" the
apparent disparities between the trial
statements and Gates' prose. Come on. They
must think us all complete idiots.
They wonder why even the IT trade press itself
(once blindly in love with MS) is becoming just
a mite cynical? Must be that "pro-Linux" bias
at work again.
huh? (Score:1)
I don't see the comparison...
I'm sure they've figured that one out... (Score:1)
What do you want to bet that Microsoft's email policies get a major overhaul after this whole thing is done? That is if it hasn't already happened. Probably purge every couple of weeks and never keep backups. If they even get a whif of an investigation, employee harddrives will probably start to spontaneously combust.
Book marked down twice before release? (Score:1)
As the subject says, I heard that it was already being discounted heavily because they think it won't sell.
It's just Slashdot (Score:1)
Just enter your preferences and turn off the "Microsoft" subject. I think that's what I'm about to do. I want to read news about new and interesting things, not more about "Evil Microsoft".
Just testing my new sig (Score:1)
Beer recipe: free! #Source
Cold pints: $2 #Product
Testing again (Score:1)
Beer recipe: free! #Source
Cold pints: $2 #Product
Testing (Score:1)
Beer recipe: free! #Source
Cold pints: $2 #Product
Testing (Score:1)
Beer recipe: free! #Source
Cold pints: $2 #Product
Testing (Score:1)
Beer recipe: free! #Source
Cold pints: $2 #Product
gah? (Score:1)
Not as easy as it sounds... (Score:1)
I hate to sound as if I am defending M$, but for a large corporation, tracking profitability by product line, by customer, etc. doesn't sound easy and in fact is not easy at all. Try working on a large ERP project sometime - there are cases out there where the ERP implementation took a few years, but the promised profitability analysis system wasn't finished for a decade, if ever.
For just one quick example, where would you charge the costs for the trial? To the Windows 95 group? The Windows 98 group? The IE group? The company as a whole? Some allocation? Why? And that's only one of the millions of classification and allocation decisions that have to me made to determine profitability.
On this one, I would be inclined to believe what was said at the trial.
sPh
Hmmmm.... (Score:1)
What this says to me is that it's ok for BG to lie in the media to the general public, since he's not under oath.. or maybe I'm just a cynic?
It doesn't add up (Score:2)
In slight defense of MS, I have to point out that MS is largely a sales and marketing company, and they might not do a very good job of splitting indirect costs (such as sales trips, marketing studies, and some advertising) into separate OS / Application components.
What they need is an "Activity Based Costing" (ABC) study.
Bravery, Kindness, Clarity, Honesty, Compassion, Generosity
It figures (Score:1)
YEAH RIGHT...... (Score:1)
ugh... (Score:1)