Topic: Vista and planned obsolescence?  (Read 8668 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2785
  • Gender: Male
Re: Vista and planned obsolescence?
« Reply #40 on: January 29, 2007, 01:58:43 pm »
That is what was said by the one who came forward.  Was he the only one approached?  We don't actually know.  Remember we know of it because he chose to be public with this.  Microsoft was silent about the idea.  If more were approached (as seems likely to me) who were they and what instructions were they given?  Why the sudden interest in "correcting" Wikipedia and why only on the OOXML vs ODF topic? 


and sometimes nem there ain't not conspiracy besides the ones that you want to believe.
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 12504
Re: Vista and planned obsolescence?
« Reply #41 on: January 29, 2007, 07:18:50 pm »
That is what was said by the one who came forward.  Was he the only one approached?  We don't actually know.  Remember we know of it because he chose to be public with this.  Microsoft was silent about the idea.  If more were approached (as seems likely to me) who were they and what instructions were they given?  Why the sudden interest in "correcting" Wikipedia and why only on the OOXML vs ODF topic? 


and sometimes nem there ain't not conspiracy besides the ones that you want to believe.


In this case I am unsure what Microsofts actual intentions, they could be benign.  But even if they started benign could we be sure they would stay that way?

However in the past I have been told that Microsoft doesn't force companies to pay them per machine sold rather than per copy of their software, it was proven in court that it was per machine (and illegal).  I was told that various "independent studies" were done without Microsoft involvement only to have the facts come out that Microsoft was involved and the whole study was as twisted as the tobacco company cancer "studies".   There have been many that times Microsoft has attempted to decieve the public and cheat the system.  I can only judge their current actions in light of their past actions.  If they want people to trust them they must be trustworthy, so far they haven't earned that trust.  Therefore I must doubt them and look for the hidden knife that they have always held before while hoping that there is in deed a new and trustworthy Microsoft growing.

Its rather like the serial criminal who is insisting that they have reformed and are innocent of the current accusation, they may be telling the truth but they have lied about reforming many times before and people are going to doubt them.  Microsoft has gone so far as to manufacture evidence to present to the U.S. court system (and admited it when caught) so how can I trust them now when they have perjured themselves in the past?
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."