during a strike, why can't they force a company to keep selling a
product or service?
M
-----Original Message-----
From: Raymond Camden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 11:35 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Microsoft Fined 613 Million?!
> Raymond Camden wrote:
> >> Seriously man. they should say "Fie, don't like it. We
> just won't
> >> sell our products in Europe now." That would last a freaking week.
> >
> > Amen. They should honor their service contracts of course,
> but outside
> > of that simply stop selling to Europe.
>
> I would like that :-)
>
>
> > I think I'm on the same side as you. MS did "bad" things, like
> > demanding computer companies only sell machines with their OS.
> > However, should that be illegal? Why can't I ask that you
> only sell Coke?
>
> The difference is that computer manufacterers depend on
> Microsoft. If they can't deliver computers with Windows
> pre-installed, they would go bankrupt. And Microsoft is using
> their dependence on Windows to force them to become
> mercenaries against third parties.
>
>
> This is regulated everywhere in society and the key is always
> dependence.
And I think that is where you and I disagree. What exactly is
dependancy? I
_really_ need food (although I could do with less ;) but I don't really
need
cable. I don't _need_ Windows. Yes I'm a heck of a lot quicker w/
Windows
than Linux, but I don't need it.
Take another analogy - What if MS decided it would no longer sell
Windows?
Would the government have the right to force them to keep selling it? I
don't believe they would have that right.
-rc
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
