sorry guys, I only sent this to tim earlier. read on below... Tim Holmes wrote: >I completely agree.
>Why is it permittied that M$ basically strong arms a vendor into >installing Windows on a new computer, but an organization that freely >gives away machines so today's youth can futher themselves by becoming >familiar with technology, is out of the question. All because that >computer uses a rival, competitor's OS. Hey guys, just to clarify, these guys were giving away 10 celeron CPUs and 1 Xeon CPU per school and the school provided the rest (Mobo, mem, case, etc) for a server and 10 X terminals using the K12's distro. Last week i think MS decided that they weren't confident about the schools WINDOWS COMPUTERS and wanted an audit of as computers running WINDOWS OS for pirated software. They said either perform and audit in a month, give us half a million, or pay for _US_ (MS) to do an audit. just asking for a school to audit their software is not a bad thing. schools need to follow the law. but it's (at a minimum) plain wrong to demand $500,000 if they can't do it in a month. how do you spell 'extortion'? it is supposed to be just a coincidence that this is the same isd that is supposed to deploy linux soon (not by next month). ya know, if MS had multi-user permissions in 95, 98 etc, maybe they wouldn't have to worry about students installing pirated software on the computers. yes, I know, xp has multi user stuff...maybe that's what the .5 mil is for. maybe this is why my ISD didn't budge on this, they didn't want an audit. -- Jason Guidry http://www.gmaestro.org -- Jason Guidry http://www.gmaestro.org
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
