Subject: Why Microsoft's Copy-Killing Has Reached a Dead End.
From: Linonut
Date: 12/16/2007 9:08:00 PM
* amicus_curious fired off this tart reply:
> <nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu> wrote in message
> news:f11fbd60-81ec-462b-b641-00ba224a0587@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Just which part of this is a "tortured interpretation of events?"
>
> Why the asinine interpretation that, due to these fairly common sorts of
> commercial disputes, Microsoft has come to the end of the trail and the
> silly sort of OSS is finally about to triumph.
Read the article.
--
Tux rox!
Subject: Why Microsoft's Copy-Killing Has Reached a Dead End.
From: Gordon
Date: 12/17/2007 11:45:55 AM
"amicus_curious" <ACDC@sti.net> wrote in message
news:4765b7e4$0$25537$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
>
> <nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu> wrote in message
> news:f11fbd60-81ec-462b-b641-00ba224a0587@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Just which part of this is a "tortured interpretation of events?"
>
> Why the asinine interpretation that, due to these fairly common sorts of
> commercial disputes,
So paying out over TWO BILLION dollars in ten years is "fairly common sort
of dispute"? Sheeeesh, what sort of commercial world do YOU live in?
Subject: Why Microsoft's Copy-Killing Has Reached a Dead End.
From: Linonut
Date: 12/17/2007 8:05:30 AM
* amicus_curious fired off this tart reply:
> Hardly an article at all. Just another rant from an uneducated computer
> techie, IMO. His tagline reads "Self-indulgent crap about me.", which at
> least shows he knows his position even if the rest of you do not.
Pfffft. Like your stuff shows any education about computer history.
> Perhaps I should start referring to my posts as "articles", too.
You already do that, implicitly.
"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
Microsoft has a very checkered past, and it needs to be aired.
--
Tux rox!
Subject: Why Microsoft's Copy-Killing Has Reached a Dead End.
From: Linonut
Date: 12/16/2007 9:08:00 PM
* amicus_curious fired off this tart reply:
> <nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu> wrote in message
> news:f11fbd60-81ec-462b-b641-00ba224a0587@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Just which part of this is a "tortured interpretation of events?"
>
> Why the asinine interpretation that, due to these fairly common sorts of
> commercial disputes, Microsoft has come to the end of the trail and the
> silly sort of OSS is finally about to triumph.
Read the article.
--
Tux rox!
Subject: Why Microsoft's Copy-Killing Has Reached a Dead End.
From: Gordon
Date: 12/17/2007 11:45:55 AM
"amicus_curious" <ACDC@sti.net> wrote in message
news:4765b7e4$0$25537$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
>
> <nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu> wrote in message
> news:f11fbd60-81ec-462b-b641-00ba224a0587@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Just which part of this is a "tortured interpretation of events?"
>
> Why the asinine interpretation that, due to these fairly common sorts of
> commercial disputes,
So paying out over TWO BILLION dollars in ten years is "fairly common sort
of dispute"? Sheeeesh, what sort of commercial world do YOU live in?
Subject: Why Microsoft's Copy-Killing Has Reached a Dead End.
From: Linonut
Date: 12/17/2007 8:05:30 AM
* amicus_curious fired off this tart reply:
> Hardly an article at all. Just another rant from an uneducated computer
> techie, IMO. His tagline reads "Self-indulgent crap about me.", which at
> least shows he knows his position even if the rest of you do not.
Pfffft. Like your stuff shows any education about computer history.
> Perhaps I should start referring to my posts as "articles", too.
You already do that, implicitly.
"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
Microsoft has a very checkered past, and it needs to be aired.
--
Tux rox!
|