Making "donations" to charity (either made by Microsoft or by The Bill and
Melinda Gates Foundation) is the best way for M$ to simultaneously create
good PR and gain new customers and revenue. Remember, software costs
basically nothing once its created. What people pay to buy software will
cover production costs (i.e. pay developers, etc.) and make the company a
tidy profit.
M$ can give away, say, 100 copies of Windos to a school. If the retail cost
of each copy of Windos is $100 then M$ can say that they gave 100 x $100 =
$10,000 worth of software to that school. In reality, since M$ _owns_ the
software, the real cost to them is the cost of the media and the cost to
print licenses. This would easily be less than $US 1 per copy, since they
mass-produce the stuff.
Now what about the hardware they donate? Doesn't M$ lose money on that? Well
they do, initially. Hardware is obviously needed for software to run, and
these poor schools cannot afford to buy any of this stuff on their own. M$
provide the hardware and the software, and make sure that the computers are
used in a productive way in the school so that they become indespensible. Now
what happens when a new version of Windos or M$ Office comes out? The schools
now feel compelled to upgrade their systems to the latest and greatest. After
all, there's no point in teaching children old technology, is there? This of
course costs money, something which these schools don't have very much of. M$
then make a profit by charging exhorbitant rates (even "educational" prices
are ridiculous) to upgrade the systems to the new software. Often, especially
in M$-Land, new software requires new hardware, so M$'s hardware partners
benefit. A computer network obviously needs administration and maintenance,
so the school must hire someone, preferably with an MCSE, to do the job.
Of course, in the centre of this are the impressionable minds of
schoolchildren. They learn at school (often indirectly) that M$ products are
good and that M$ is a nice company because it gave them the opportunity to
use computers at school (by donating them). When they go home, they convince
their parents and family friends that M$ products are good, and so they buy a
Windos computer for themselves, complete with M$ applications. And so the
cycle contuinues. The users grow used to M$ products and as a result do
not have any wish to change to something better. If they ever use something
else they just get annoyed that it isn't Windows (i.e. it doesn't behave
_exactly_ like Windows).
Anyway, I'll cut my rant there. I'm sure you all get my point.
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001 13:16, Lanman wrote:
> Here's an extra FYI for anyone following this thread. I heard somewhere
> that Bill Gates and his wife were involved in a charity that gives
> computers to kids in schools. You'd think that Bill would jump at the
> chance of getting some good PR for a change, and help these schools. He can
> certainly afford it! Good tax write-off too. Oh, well, maybe the whole
> thing was a PR sham on his part ! HHmmmmm!
>
> Dan LaBine
>
> On July 18, 2001 06:45 am, you wrote:
> > At 02:32 AM 7/16/01 +1000, you wrote:
> > >This is about a *charity* that is giving computers to *poor* people.
> > > Chances are that these people have hardly ever touched a computer,
> > > leave alone owning one (no insensitivity intended). Do you think they
> > > can afford a copy of
> >
> > Gotta add to this as this is a subject dear to my heart.
> >
> > I recall reading/hearing somewhere that these _donated_ computers come
> > from the donors (typically large companies) with Windblows already
> > installed. Now I'm not sure of the fine print but haven't the donor
> > companies _already_ paid for the licence ?
> >
> > Thus MS is effectively asking for payment twice for the same piece of
> > software. Most business I know realise that once you have paid for an
> > item _once_ you own it (case in point : when you buy pavers for your
> > house and then you sell your house, Boral doesn't expect the new owner to
> > pay for the pavers a second time).
> >
> > Couldn't the donor companies just sign a bit of paper saying "donated -
> > one old computer complete with windows .... installed" ?
> >
> > Or is M$ a special case ??
> >
> > Once again M$ have led the field in the ever increasing race to screw
> > everyone. Starting with the people who can _least_ afford it.
> >
> > It's a bloody charity.... M$ need to give a little and just say
> > "naughty. We won't take it any further, if you just stop doing
> > it". Alternatively they could get a heart and allow the charity to
> > install win95 on machines that _dont_ come pre-loaded (remember these are
> > old machines so they probably won't run 2000/XP) subject to a 'cap' of
> > {say} 200 a year.
> >
> > Alternatively, the charity could be innundated with offers of support
> > from the linux community asking if they have considered linux / open
> > office. And pointing out that the support offered by mailing lists is
> > very good...
> >
> > Possibly even the local linux users could come and offer to "hand hold"
> > through the first couple of installs.
> >
> > Now where was this charity located again ??
--
Sridhar Dhanapalan.
"There are two major products that come from Berkeley:
LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence."
-- Jeremy S. Anderson
