Submitted by “Does Microsoft’s monopoly power extend to government and media? That seems like a rhetorical question given their little power play in Massachusetts. Is now the time to share our experience with the rest of the world?”
“Does Microsoft’s monopoly power extend to government and media? That seems like a rhetorical question given their little power play in Massachusetts. Is now the time to share our experience with the rest of the world?”
<troll>
the 5th branch of government, after the media, but before the AARP?
</troll>
Enough already with these idiotic sites that are linked every single day – especially that lxer.com site that has no clue about reality that it’s emabarrassing for osnews.
Oh well, I’ll just continue adblocking everything on osnews.
“I don’t care how many of you detest counter-media figures like Bill O’Reilly and Wolf Blitzer…”
Is this an American attempt at sarcasm: labelling two high-profile employees of Big Media (the former a particularly objectionable example) as “counter-media”?
I wrote a book about that kind of thing, taken to the extreme. It’s free/donation for download : )
http://www.brendamake.com/numbers/
what power play did MS do. Them not caving to some dumb move of Mass. is not them pulling a power play. Its them not caring what dumb move some state tries.
what power play did MS do. Them not caving to some dumb move of Mass. is not them pulling a power play. Its them not caring what dumb move some state tries.
No matter how it turns out, the move the state tried was SMART. Microsoft was trying to bully Mass into updating their systems to Office 12 with proprietary file formats that would keep Mass locked into MS contracts. By pushing for open standards, they forced MS to either adopt another standard, or open up their own. Would MS have submitted their Office 12 schema to ISO/ECMA if not for Mass? That’s SMART.
In response, MS was stupid and bullish. They tried to do an end run around the people in charge through paid flunkies, and eventually had to back down on their proprietary stance. MS was outplayed, despite their money and bought politicians.
Its them not caring what dumb move some state tries.
Yeah, submitting their file formats to ECMA to get them recognized as a standard. Way not to cave or care. They were “just smart enough” to decide to do this now by complete coincidence. Let’s see what other file format coincidences occur after the standards certification process completes.
Don’t forget, not only is Massachussets dumb so is the EU and the National Archives of Australia. And these are only the best known examples. There are probably hundreds of other stupid governments, businesses and public service organizations that aren’t smart enough to keep from trying to have some input on or control over their own data files as well.
Normally I would just say screw ’em. But in this case that job is already in the hands of the much wiser heads in Redmond.
they do partially own a cable news channel in America; >MS<NBC
“Does Microsoft’s monopoly power extend to government and media?
Duh yeah like they were not broken up by the U.S. Goverment couple years back come on please.
as far as I can tell, most media outlets(with the exception of evil right wing fox) are pro linux/firefox, whenever these very small players in the market are on the off-chance mentioned.
Give it time. They’ll be going on and on about big microsoft the way the go on and on about big oil once linux becomes a mainstream player.
Their audience has to know about linux before they can start the indoctrination.
does anybody even watch fox anyways?
Maybe it’s too early for me.
1) Why fox news? What does fox news have to do with any of this?
2) The article seems to jump all over place. First msft, then national politics (with no apparent ties to msft), then msft again.
3) What is wrong with the articles he cites? I don’t like the situation in MA either, but the cited articles seem to be factual.
Maybe it’s just me, but that article seems like incoherent ranting. With the final suggestion to write . . . fox news? WTF?
I think the article has an interesting subject line, after that it’s just cr@p.
Yeah, you’re missing something.
The liberal media is *SUPPOSED* to have a monopoly. It’s the natural order of things.
That faux tells more of (x story) than the rest do is bad. You’re only supposed to get certain parts of (x story), because conservatives are bad. And they’re determined to make you think that, as opposed to informing you about the whole story.
You can even take note of his reference to DeLay.
Part of his point about “media monopoly” is about the whole story being left out, yet he himself does this……. Abramoff was in bed with democrats too. Talk about buried facts.
If it weren’t for Faux(and other evil right wing outlets), the majority of americans wouldn’t know about that last little tidbit. Now don’t misunderstand. You have to watch/listen to a liberal outlet such as the clinton news network or national propaganda radio otherwise you won’t get the whole story due to fox’s buried facts.
But this guy is trying to talk about propaganda by propagandizing. It’s totally laughable.
Edited 2005-11-24 19:00