[SASAG] Proprietary Formats on Public Mailing Lists -- Was: Re: System Admin Job opportunity
benjamin at seattlefenix.net
Sat Sep 1 02:45:23 PDT 2007
* Jim Hogan (jim.hogan at gmail.com) [070901 02:09]:
> On 9/1/07, <benjamin at seattlefenix.net> wrote:
> > But that was some good rhetoric. I especially liked the part where you built a beautiful
> > strawman out of the open formats issue and then burned it up with the
> > implication that Microsoft controls the world (and I'm ok with it).
> Well, you seemed to be painting a fairly broad "immature
> anti-Microsoft zealot" stroke as if there weren't reasons for
> customers to not like MSFT.
A man who does not know of or care for the difference between disliking his neighbor and burning his neighbor's house down can only be accurately described as a true psychopath.
> > I might be worried if it weren't for the fact that justice departments
> > across the world are once again lifting an eyebrow and contemplating
> > how far they will let Microsoft go before pulling on the anti-monopoly leash.
> This sounds like what MSFT's PR department would say, but does not
> seem to align with current reality in the post Penfield Jackson world.
> It is even more ironic that consumers in the US of A may be protected
> from monopoly practices by the (sometimes) more aggressive stance of
> the European Union. But you may be an optimist.
Microsoft's PR department would say what? I'm sorry, but you've stopped making sense.
> > Then again, I can't think of the last time a technology standards
> > board actually did anything relevant to the IT industry at all.
> Oh, OK. If you say so. But you got my email via S-M-T-P, right? `
If your best argument for the relevancy of standards boards is to point at a protocol written 25 years ago by one guy at USC, I guess we're done here.
Tough Internet Guy
More information about the Members