Re: [SLUG] Microsoft Must support Linux - why else would they do this.

From: Frank Roberts - SOTL (sotl155360@earthlink.net)
Date: Thu May 17 2001 - 20:41:46 EDT


I once worked for a company that was even more arrogant than Microsoft.

Worked for them for 18 years.

Had a lot of fun there.

Travel all over the world.

They were a fortune 20 Company.

Big, powerful, old line, and arrogant.

Just too damn arrogant for the customers.

They bankrupted a few years back.

Nobody misses them.

Microsoft reminds me of them.

Have a bet with a friend that Microsoft stock is going to single didgets.

He does not believe it. I do.

Seen it bedore DEC, Xerox and several others:
DEC $240 to $3 in 6 months.

Wonder if anyone is going to miss Microsoft.

I won't.

Just too damn arrogant.

Meantime I do my best to forget about them because I honestly don't care what
they do or don't do.

Frank

On Thursday 17 May 2001 08:03 PM, you wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 May 2001 06:33 am, you wrote:
> > Here's Microsoft's latest attempt at turning people
> > against them. Not that they need to push to hard :)
> >
> >
> > http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/stories/story/0,10738,2760413,00.html
>
> this was fascinating. especially Tim bishops comments
> about how xp rocks. some people just dont understand
> what microsoft will do to further entrench themselves
> in peoples lives and this tim guy's occupation is listed
> as education. go figure.
>
> microsoft basically is forcing their customers to upgrade
> now or else and some person in education no less is
> telling people it rocks. whats wrong with this picture ?
>
> > =====
> > ---------------------------------
> > The requirements said
> > "Windows 95/98/NT or better"
> > So I installed Linux
> > ---------------------------------
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
> > http://auctions.yahoo.com/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:29:30 EDT