On Sunday 08 June 2003 22:42, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Government decision that all schools should use OpenOffice would also cost > the taxpayers (maybe less) and lock out the competition. The only visible > difference is that "we" win and "they" lose. That's OK, but speaking in > these terms and speaking about public benefit and freedom in the same time > doesn't sit well.
OK, you are right, so let's define it in matters which REALLY matter, for instance, define it in terms of the document format: The format must be completly documented and open (i.e. its definition cannot be changed at will by some closed interest group, but by some open standards body). As a government, I think there is some obligation to them to put out a tender and choose the best option, where money must play a part. Even if they choose MS at the end of the process - the format will still have to be open and they'll probably have to pay less for it (see, for instance, the slashdot(?) item about how Lindows resellers get MS products for 50$). Would that be practicle and satisfy the requirement you described above? > > >> Microsoft seems to DO have the "us vs. them" mentality, as you put it. > >> They > > They have to. Otherwise the shareholders would sue them :) Fine. So as I said - MS's shareholders defined the rules - let's play that game until we have enough power to rewrite the rules. ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
