Microsoft hits new ethical low point?

[niall at kst.com (Niall Kavanagh)]

On 18 Feb 2001, Derek Atkins wrote:

> You know, it's amazing how many people thought I was really serious
> in my "devil's advocate" argument.  But the problem is that M$ does
> put forward these arguments (or at least similarly inane arguments ;)
> and the public seems to lap it up.  The real question is: how do you
> fight a PR machine that get thirsty people to drink their sand?
> 

You don't. Choice is good. When your choices have drastic fundemental
differences, so much the better.

Look at how homogenous the politcal climate is in the US, and the apathy
it has induced in the populance. Did it really make any difference in the
day-to-day lives of most Americans that Bush beat Gore? No, it didn't.
Neither party has any incentive to think outside the box because they're
both following the same course. Fortunately we have other voices gaining
more exposure, like the Libetarians and Green Party.

I for one am very glad Windows exists. It provides a powerful example to
compare alternatives against.

--
Niall Kavanagh, niall at kst.com
News, articles, and resources for web professionals and developers:
http://www.kst.com


-
Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the
message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).