[ Date Index ][
Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date /
thread ]
[ Next by date /
thread => ]
Adrian Midgley wrote:
The status of OEM licencing of software, and what constitutes original machines, or the items of hardware with which such OEM licences may be sold has not AFAIK and IANAL been resolved, but it is at least possible that this user could have installed his previous operating system on his new computer, thus resolving the problems of program compatibility he found.
That of course depends on the media and delivery of OEM software. My laptop comes with a "ghost" style image of Windows 98 - if I ever have to reinstall it needs a partition the same size as the original disk - and guess what is using most of that disk space... Rhymes with Tux (5). Microsoft won't support OEM OS software they insist you go through the hardware provider, who won't support it on other hardware, so effectively you are stuffed.
just like the pharmaceutical industry that pushes 28000 drugs thro Dr's. 90% of which have no proven curative benefit whatsoever.That is perhaps why we use them to ameliorate symptoms and control disease rather than to cure it. Morphine doesn't cure disease, but it is a benefit many people have reason to be thankful for.
Wow - 10% have a curative effect? I thought only antibiotics cured anything, and a few things stimulate the body to cure itself more effectively, mostly by suppressing inflammation.
Ned Ludd and his followers resisted the loss of their jobs, one of the viral things about MS is that it creates jobs. Which offers greater employment for low-grade IT technicians, an operating system and applications where everything is understandable, or one where the the details are hidden and only accessible to the senior members of the Guild; programs that work usually and evolve gradually under pressures from users, or programs that are flaky and driven by marketing hype?
Nah in the old days real computers would have a team of a dozen highly paid specialists or so supporting each one. Personal computers have about one person to 50 or 60 computers, and better organised enterprises claim one person to 200 desktops. I suspect the figures include a lot of hidden employee time maintaining their own PC's. I don't think MS makes much difference, although Apples were probably easier to run, most of the variation in support effort is down to non-technical aspects (Except perhaps viruses and security work, which is forming a disproportionately increasing amount of Microsoft support effort).
One of the tasks for the OS/FS movement is to demonstrate an economic environment where those working "in IT" can expect to continue to do so, and to continue to benefit themselves, and since they have the same needs as the rest of us even if their livelihood is MS, to benefit their fellow-citizens and co-workers.
The chief benefit to other co-workers is to keep them working whilst keeping costs low, so less support being needed is generally a good thing.
Peru looks like a good start.
A national lobbying effort is just underway here. I think Europe is slightly more clueful than New Labour. New Labour seems only too happy to sit down with BG and friends despite the huge fiascoes already experienced. But then big government projects seem more designed to prop up the IT industry than actually deliver better government services at a reasonable price, otherwise they would be better run. Look at the CPS new system for a real classic example of how not to deploy a new system. http://www.affs.org.uk/ -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.