4 ms·
Yes, because his argument was that it could be done with cheaper hardware and some IT-smarts (aka salaried employees managing it).
by maaku 14y ago
Yes, because his argument was that it could be done with cheaper hardware and some IT-smarts (aka salaried employees managing it).
- thaumaturgy 14y ago> ...and some IT-smarts... I don't think he said that. For one, cheaper hardware doesn't imply increased management costs; for two, the more expensive hardware didn't come with a support contract included in the price (at least, it's not mentioned in the article); for three, his comment reads to me that they could have optionally put the money towards employing people, to put people back to work -- i.e., it was one example of a better way to spend the money. I don't see anything in his comment that implies, "cheaper hardware and some IT-smarts...".