3 ms·

> Meh, there is a lot of room for argument here. Not really. I got my info from senior managers at some of the (very large, Taiwanese) companies concerned. >

by scholia 12y ago

> Meh, there is a lot of room for argument here. Not really. I got my info from senior managers at some of the (very large, Taiwanese) companies concerned. > I think the real problem, after MS' many anti-competitive shenanigans is that most people just think MS Windows is synonymous with "computer". Microsoft has never been accused or taken to court for any "anti-competitive shenanigans" re the success of Windows, only for ways it tried to exploit that success. > Those who really want a Linux PC will just buy the hardware they want and install it themselves. Yes, exactly. And they will install whichever of the 157 versions they prefer. These are among the reasons why it's hard to make a profit selling Linux PCs.

fnordfnordfnord 12y ago
>Not really. I got my info from senior managers at some of the (very large, Taiwanese) companies concerned. Oh. Why didn't you tell me that you had a real authoritative source? /s >Microsoft has never been accused or taken to court Microsoft's historical business practices WRT both Apple and Linux are well documented. Lawyers have made whole careers work generated. There is no need to hash this out for the billion +1th time. >These are among the reasons why it's h... I don't know who you think you're arguing with. I haven't asked you for seed money. I've not tried to convince you to go into business selling PC's.
- scholia 12y ago
  > Oh. Why didn't you tell me that you had a real authoritative source? /s Sorry, reality intruded. I should have known you'd find that a problem. However, you could get a clue from the fact that most companies who have tried to sell Linux have either stopped or gone bust, or do it on a very small number of systems. This is not because they are against making a profit. > Microsoft's historical business practices WRT both Apple and Linux are well documented. Up to a point. But most of the inexpert comment I see is badly informed and usually wrong. Still, who reads documentation? > I don't know who you think you're arguing with My mistake, I didn't know I was arguing....

by scholia 12y ago

fnordfnordfnord 12y ago

>Not really. I got my info from senior managers at some of the (very large, Taiwanese) companies concerned. Oh. Why didn't you tell me that you had a real authoritative source? /s >Microsoft has never been accused or taken to court Microsoft's historical business practices WRT both Apple and Linux are well documented. Lawyers have made whole careers work generated. There is no need to hash this out for the billion +1th time. >These are among the reasons why it's h... I don't know who you think you're arguing with. I haven't asked you for seed money. I've not tried to convince you to go into business selling PC's.

scholia 12y ago
> Oh. Why didn't you tell me that you had a real authoritative source? /s Sorry, reality intruded. I should have known you'd find that a problem. However, you could get a clue from the fact that most companies who have tried to sell Linux have either stopped or gone bust, or do it on a very small number of systems. This is not because they are against making a profit. > Microsoft's historical business practices WRT both Apple and Linux are well documented. Up to a point. But most of the inexpert comment I see is badly informed and usually wrong. Still, who reads documentation? > I don't know who you think you're arguing with My mistake, I didn't know I was arguing....