On Sun, 2005-02-13 at 18:36, Kunal Shah wrote: > For Microsoft, they have policy, if it's the problem of Microsoft, they wont > charge you. If its problem of your application, they will charge you > heavily. > > As I said, we could never go in production with Linux. this thread has really reminded me that i'm glad i'm out of that industry. for a long time i wrote Linux content for TechRepublic and CNET and the entire time had to fight to keep Linux alive with those above me. it was these same types of arguments that caused me headache after headache. why? because those in the positions that make the decisions tend to be absolutely clueless what really and truly works. what they want, instead, are SLAs ROIs and various certificates and promises that often don't come through anyway. instead they should be leaving these decisions to those they hired to work in the trenches in the first place. maybe if they did that their would be far less problems with microsoft because then microsoft would find themselves struggling for an audience and the Linux vendors would find themselves growing and growing. i know it's off topic but i wanted to share. -- jack wallen, jr (mailto: jlwallen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) AIM: linuxula or maryjanecapri resume site: http://www.monkeypantz.net/main/ public key: http://www.monkeypantz.net/jlwallen.asc
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
