Bill Stanley wrote:

> I read the linked webpage and judging from the reader comments, this
> website is hardly neutral.

Well, no, of course it's not neutral. Almost all the reporting is either
viewing it as a good thing or a bad thing.

> The opinions are distinctly pro-Windows. It's not surprising that
> they paint a pretty face on things. They say that Microsoft did not
> directly develop the protocol and are simply implementing it.

Which, while besides the point, is true.

> My question is how much support in terms of money and free manpower
> did they contribute.

I'm intrigued - why would that matter?

> the support came from M$.

Please don't do that. It's 'MS'.

--
Avi

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Avi Greenbury <lists@avi.co> wrote:

Bill Stanley wrote:



> I read the linked webpage and judging from the reader comments, this

> website is hardly neutral.



Well, no, of course it's not neutral. Almost all the reporting is either

viewing it as a good thing or a bad thing.



> The opinions are distinctly pro-Windows. It's not surprising that

> they paint a pretty face on things. *They say that Microsoft did not

> directly develop the protocol and are simply implementing it.



Which, while besides the point, is true.



> My question is how much support in terms of money and free manpower

> did they contribute.



I'm intrigued - why would that matter?



> the support came from M$.



Please don't do that. It's 'MS'.



--

Avi



--

ubuntu-users mailing list

ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com

Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users


The poster may be using the M$ to avoid any possibility of repercussions for the unauthorized use of a trademarked name/abreviation that may be viewed unfavorably by the legal department of the trademark holder.

Everybody knows what the euphemism refers to.* The use of it shows a deliberate attempt to avoid infringing on the trademark while expressing an opinion.
--
Accidental deaths by firearms account for less than 1% of the 30,000.
*There are three times as many medical mistake deaths in the US than
there are accidental gun deaths.* Perhaps we need safety locks on
doctors and nurses?




--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On Tuesday, September 27, 2011 09:15:20 am compdoc wrote:
> >My question is how much support in terms of money and
> >free manpower did they contribute. I wouldn't be surprised to
> >learn that most of the support came from M$.
>
> And if MS did contribute, that would make it evil?

No. If their principle purpose of support is to create a system that locks
out competitors on purpose, exploiting their monopoly power, that's evil.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On Tuesday, September 27, 2011 08:14:19 pm Ernest Doub wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Avi Greenbury <lists@avi.co> wrote:
> > Bill Stanley wrote:
> > > I read the linked webpage and judging from the reader comments, this
> > > website is hardly neutral.
> >
> > Well, no, of course it's not neutral. Almost all the reporting is either
> > viewing it as a good thing or a bad thing.
> >
> > > The opinions are distinctly pro-Windows. It's not surprising that
> > > they paint a pretty face on things. They say that Microsoft did not
> > > directly develop the protocol and are simply implementing it.
> >
> > Which, while besides the point, is true.

Why can't it be true, and also be mere propaganda? Is the use of proxies to
avoid taking responsibility for one's own actions acceptable, in your opinion?

> >
> > > My question is how much support in terms of money and free manpower
> > > did they contribute.
> >
> > I'm intrigued - why would that matter?

You don't think Microsoft's cash matters? Please explain.

> >
> > > the support came from M$.
> >
> > Please don't do that. It's 'MS'.
> >
In what way is "MS" more appropriate than "M$?"

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On 09/27/2011 01:41 PM, Billie Walsh wrote:

On 09/27/2011 11:15 AM, compdoc wrote:

My question is how much support in terms of money and
free manpower did they contribute. I wouldn't be surprised to
learn that most of the support came from M$.



And if MS did contribute, that would make it evil?


But of course. Anything Microsoft touches is evil. Microsoft IS the


If they did something humanistic, I'd be reaching for one of BC's dirty
martini's. Truly they have no "priors" for playing fair. Someone name
just one. :ric



--
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

Tim Hanson wrote:

> On Tuesday, September 27, 2011 08:14:19 pm Ernest Doub wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Avi Greenbury <lists@avi.co>
> > wrote:
> > > Bill Stanley wrote:
> > > > I read the linked webpage and judging from the reader comments,
> > > > this website is hardly neutral.
> > >
> > > Well, no, of course it's not neutral. Almost all the reporting is
> > > either viewing it as a good thing or a bad thing.
> > >
> > > > The opinions are distinctly pro-Windows. It's not surprising
> > > > that they paint a pretty face on things. They say that
> > > > Microsoft did not directly develop the protocol and are simply
> > > > implementing it.
> > >
> > > Which, while besides the point, is true.
>
> Why can't it be true, and also be mere propaganda? Is the use of
> proxies to avoid taking responsibility for one's own actions
> acceptable, in your opinion?

Well, it can. Though that's more normally termed 'marketing'.

I thought you were meaning to imply that MS *did* directly implement
the protocol or that the fact that they were saying this was somehow
important.

> > > > My question is how much support in terms of money and free
> > > > manpower did they contribute.
> > >
> > > I'm intrigued - why would that matter?
>
> You don't think Microsoft's cash matters? Please explain.

I'm not sure what there is to explain; if someone produces something
useful or good, I don't think the goodness of that something is
contingent on the goodness of that someone.

> > > > the support came from M$.
> > >
> > > Please don't do that. It's 'MS'.
> > >
> In what way is "MS" more appropriate than "M$?"

Well, 'MS' is an obvious abbreviation for 'Microsoft' while 'M$'
reminds me of trolling.

It's just rather hard to look like you're making a reasonable point
while maintaining that spelling of Microsoft. If you're that wedded to
using it, I can't say I'm *that* bothered, I just wish people wouldn't
do it.

--
Avi

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On Wednesday, September 28, 2011 12:04:46 am Avi Greenbury wrote:
> Tim Hanson wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 27, 2011 08:14:19 pm Ernest Doub wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Avi Greenbury <lists@avi.co>
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > Bill Stanley wrote:
> > > > > I read the linked webpage and judging from the reader comments,
> > > > > this website is hardly neutral.
> > > >
> > > > Well, no, of course it's not neutral. Almost all the reporting is
> > > > either viewing it as a good thing or a bad thing.
> > > >
> > > > > The opinions are distinctly pro-Windows. It's not surprising
> > > > > that they paint a pretty face on things. They say that
> > > > > Microsoft did not directly develop the protocol and are simply
> > > > > implementing it.
> > > >
> > > > Which, while besides the point, is true.
> >
> > Why can't it be true, and also be mere propaganda? Is the use of
> > proxies to avoid taking responsibility for one's own actions
> > acceptable, in your opinion?
>
> Well, it can. Though that's more normally termed 'marketing'.

No problem, as long as readers recognize it as such, and not an honest
evaluation from neutrals. And it is true, except that M$ has been caught,
both in the U.S. and Europe, of arm-twisting behind the scenes to, for
example, compel hardware manufacturers to ship only Microsoft products. One
should be very wary of this kind of downstream blame shifting.

>
> I thought you were meaning to imply that MS *did* directly implement
> the protocol or that the fact that they were saying this was somehow
> important.

No. They're smart. If they did mandate an exclusionary protocol overtly,
authorities would have a strong case. This way they can drive the process
covertly, by withholding joint marketing arrangements, charging one
manufacturer more for Windows, etc., etc. This way, they can say, in effect,
"Hey, it's not us! Go over there and talk to that guy!" So their hands are
clean, but suddenly no one is shipping hardware with OS/2 on it, or Linux, or
Netscape, or any other competing technology, no matter how innovative.

Go to the Dell site and see if you can find their Ubuntu products.

>
> > > > > My question is how much support in terms of money and free
> > > > > manpower did they contribute.
> > > >
> > > > I'm intrigued - why would that matter?
> >
> > You don't think Microsoft's cash matters? Please explain.
>
> I'm not sure what there is to explain; if someone produces something
> useful or good, I don't think the goodness of that something is
> contingent on the goodness of that someone.
>
> > > > > the support came from M$.
> > > >
> > > > Please don't do that. It's 'MS'.
> >
> > In what way is "MS" more appropriate than "M$?"
>
> Well, 'MS' is an obvious abbreviation for 'Microsoft' while 'M$'
> reminds me of trolling.

Well, sorry to inflame your tender sensibilities. This list has a code of
conduct. Is there a separate one for you only?

>
> It's just rather hard to look like you're making a reasonable point
> while maintaining that spelling of Microsoft.

I appreciate the incredible difficulty. On a Linux list, let's just call it
marketing.

> If you're that wedded to
> using it, I can't say I'm *that* bothered, I just wish people wouldn't
> do it.

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 08:14:19PM -0700, Ernest Doub wrote:
> The poster may be using the M$ to avoid any possibility of repercussions
> for the unauthorized use of a trademarked name/abreviation that may be
> viewed unfavorably by the legal department of the trademark holder.
> Everybody knows what the euphemism refers to.� The use of it shows a
> deliberate attempt to avoid infringing on the trademark while expressing
> an opinion.

This makes no sense and I'm afraid it really just sounds like an excuse
for using a childish name. Using a trademark to refer to the owner of
the trademark is not trademark infringement.

Let's be grown-ups about how we refer to our competitors.

--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@ubuntu.com]

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Colin Watson <cjwatson@ubuntu.com> wrote:

On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 08:14:19PM -0700, Ernest Doub wrote:

> Â* Â*The poster may be using the M$ to avoid any possibility of repercussions

> Â* Â*for the unauthorized use of a trademarked name/abreviation that may be

> Â* Â*viewed unfavorably by the legal department of the trademark holder.

> Â* Â*Everybody knows what the euphemism refers to.� The use of it shows a

> Â* Â*deliberate attempt to avoid infringing on the trademark while expressing

> Â* Â*an opinion.



This makes no sense and I'm afraid it really just sounds like an excuse

for using a childish name. Â*Using a trademark to refer to the owner of

the trademark is not trademark infringement.



Let's be grown-ups about how we refer to our competitors.



--

Colin Watson Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* [cjwatson@ubuntu.com]



--

ubuntu-users mailing list

ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com

Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users


Excuse me for not turning on the big red flashing sarcasm light.
--
Accidental deaths by firearms account for less than 1% of the 30,000.
Â*There are three times as many medical mistake deaths in the US than
there are accidental gun deaths.Â* Perhaps we need safety locks on
doctors and nurses?




--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users