Comment Re:We should punish MS, not MS. (Score 1) 780
Use an non-Microsoft OS? Ha, that's a laugh! MacOS X can't run half the apps I use at work, and Linux currently runs even less than that (though I will make the switch as soon as it's tenable; right now it's not). What a joker you are. It seems you live and breathe the Microsoft dream, but I assure you that dream is as disconnected from reality as can be. Perhaps it is because you work for Microsoft, but I'll give you a break since almost everybody who works for them espouses the "Microsoft Way". Microsoft IS a corporate thug, among the very worst in all of history. Do you know your history? The amount of money at stake in this case is immense, more so than any anti-trust case before it, but there is something even greater in peril: the control of information, vital to democracy and the fight against tyranny. Indeed, there are things in this life worse than murder. If Microsoft is allowed to continue its accumulation of power, I doubt there is little they wouldn't be capable of doing to defend that power. It's just that Microsoft already wields sufficient power to achieve their ends without having to resort to the more violent forms of skulduggery. But a murderer of truth is a murderer nonetheless; history will show you that the two usually go hand-in-hand. Microsoft excels in butchering the truth. I suspect Goebbels would be proud.
Let's get some things straight. Microsoft lost the DOJ case; anyone who says otherwise is lying. What happened is that the Bush administration forced the DOJ to reduce terms of punishment to near-nothing. It's like being tried for murder and convicted of murder, but the Judge reduces the sentence of capital punishment to a fine payable in funny money. That's a more accurate analogy. The DOJ won and had the advantage; Microsoft could very well have had the book thrown at them if the DOJ chose to throw it, but Bush forced them to back down. The public sector still supports punishment, but the political sector and the courts backed down due to financial incentives given by Microsoft to the Bush Administration. The public sector's view on this matter is not represented by opinion pieces in the Wall Street Journal. There is still widespread sentiment in the public, the part of it that cannot be manipulated by Microsoft marketing, that supports significant punishment for Microsoft. I suspect the greater part of the public cannot be manipulated by Microsoft marketing anyway, judging from the poor sales of WinXP. Can you say DOA? But no matter, the carcass of WinXP will be forced down their throats regardless. This is a perfect example of one of the many consequences of the abuse of monopoly power.
I could respond to the rest of your statement, full of lies and doublespeak as it is, but my point is clear. Microsoft, among the most thuggish corporations in history, has violated anti-trust laws in the most egregious manner and requires punishment. If we fail to punish them, we will surely relinquish our control of the information infrastructure. And if we relinquish that, we relinquish the possibility of preserving a free and just society. We embrace tyranny and all that goes with it. We will repeat the worst mistakes of history, and accept the consequences, dire as they will be.
Let's get some things straight. Microsoft lost the DOJ case; anyone who says otherwise is lying. What happened is that the Bush administration forced the DOJ to reduce terms of punishment to near-nothing. It's like being tried for murder and convicted of murder, but the Judge reduces the sentence of capital punishment to a fine payable in funny money. That's a more accurate analogy. The DOJ won and had the advantage; Microsoft could very well have had the book thrown at them if the DOJ chose to throw it, but Bush forced them to back down. The public sector still supports punishment, but the political sector and the courts backed down due to financial incentives given by Microsoft to the Bush Administration. The public sector's view on this matter is not represented by opinion pieces in the Wall Street Journal. There is still widespread sentiment in the public, the part of it that cannot be manipulated by Microsoft marketing, that supports significant punishment for Microsoft. I suspect the greater part of the public cannot be manipulated by Microsoft marketing anyway, judging from the poor sales of WinXP. Can you say DOA? But no matter, the carcass of WinXP will be forced down their throats regardless. This is a perfect example of one of the many consequences of the abuse of monopoly power.
I could respond to the rest of your statement, full of lies and doublespeak as it is, but my point is clear. Microsoft, among the most thuggish corporations in history, has violated anti-trust laws in the most egregious manner and requires punishment. If we fail to punish them, we will surely relinquish our control of the information infrastructure. And if we relinquish that, we relinquish the possibility of preserving a free and just society. We embrace tyranny and all that goes with it. We will repeat the worst mistakes of history, and accept the consequences, dire as they will be.
