On Monday 29 December 2008 11:21, Sachin Gopalakrishnan wrote:
> > Companies exist to provide a service to society. In the process
> > they make money.
>
> No they dont. Name one company which exist only to serve society
> and i shall show you a failed company!

You completely misunderstand. Every company exists to provide a 
service. They MAY fail because of many reasons. But they WILL fail if 
they cannot provide the service that they propose in a satisfactory 
way.

>
> > Given that they exist to provide a service to society,
>
> no they don't sir.
>
> > Ofcourse there are any number of crooked companies and people
> > whose sole ethic is to make money.
>
> I dont understand why is making money so bad?? As i see it we all
> work hard so
> that we can gain money to provide for more comforts. What is wrong
> in doing so?

You again miss the point. There is absolutely nothing wrong ( though 
amassing pieces of paper is kind of strange) in making money 
ETHICALLY. Thus making money by providing a service to small section 
of society, while knowingly damaging other sections is definetly 
wrong. The law tries to recognise the existence of such behaviour and 
legislates to prevent it. However as tech and society changes the law 
falls behind (sometimes deliberately). At such time the ethical 
company recognises and corrects itself, thus protecting itself from 
future problems.

> Am no MS supporter but they have gone a long way to make money,
> they made the desktop ubiquitous.

Boss, you need a major reeducation in the history of computing. Thank 
god you never said billy baba invented computers.

>
> They marketed their product so well that more and more people
> wanted to buy it, this helped in bringing down prices. Enough for us 
> to sit and argue over in on our own personal computers.

You make me laugh. Just do everybody a favour by reading up about the 
various law suits filed against the company about stolen ip, illegal 
practices etec. etc.

> Now they did this for money not to fulfill any philanthropic urge.

Ethics != philanthrophy.

> I don't see why we should bash MS just for making money. If they
> had monopolistic
> practices its because the competition wasnt good enough and allowed
> it to be a monopoly.

Snip. 
As i said you really need to get the facts from some place other than 
wherever you are getting them from. Periodically we get thoroughly 
misinformed members on the list. However it has been sometime since 
the last one. Cant blame the poor members though, the disinformation 
from M$ and their puppets is huge and the poor reader thinks it's 
great marketing. If anything they are as terrible at marketing as 
they are at tech.

Read the list for an abridged version. Or go to groklaw.net in the M$ 
section.


-- 
Rgds
JTD
-- 
http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
  • Re: [... Nagarjuna G.
    • ... Dinesh Joshi
      • ... Nagarjuna G.
        • ... Kenneth Gonsalves
        • ... jtd
        • ... Kenneth Gonsalves
        • ... jtd
        • ... Vikram Vincent
        • ... Kenneth Gonsalves
        • ... Sachin Gopalakrishnan
        • ... jtd
        • ... Dinesh Shah (દિન ેશ શાહ/द िनेश शाह)
        • ... Kenneth Gonsalves
        • ... Dinesh Shah (દિન ેશ શાહ/द िनेश शाह)
        • ... Kenneth Gonsalves
        • ... Shamit Verma
        • ... Kenneth Gonsalves
        • ... jtd
        • ... Kenneth Gonsalves
        • ... Balachandran Sivakumar
        • ... Dinesh Shah

Reply via email to