Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 11,302
*** Wrote this very fast (in response to another thread, it got me thinking), the english is not the greatest, so please be patient ! ,lol ***
Just had a random realisation, microsoft, everyone moans about them, taking over the industry, bulling other companies and all that, and charging and become the richest company on the planet nearly.
The idea to westerners of linux as an honest and free for all system makes sense on the surface as an ethically and good idea, or is it ?
If the world went linux, software would be free, companies would be 'free' and all would be well, would it ?
I cant help thinking, in short, yes microsoft 'destroy' or buy out other companies that displease them or are a competator, however the people working for these other companies either get big payouts, become part of microsoft or go onto other jobs, they certanly don't become homeless or die of starvation.
Now I cant help not notice, bill gates has given $15 billion of his own money to good causes, and helping the needy, microsoft and its other executives have no doubt given more than me or joe naverage will earn in there lifetimes to good causes.
Gates has now given the rest of his life to making sure needy people get aid and not just some money as most other charities do, (I've noticed a lot of reports of charities using most of the donations to keep them running instead of it going to the needy)
So what im trying to say is........the people like me and u who own and buy windows vista or whatever, who lets be honest, WONT die if we spend £60 for something we use contstantly, who YES may get annoyed at some of the annoyances it throws up.........but no more than linux or any other OS in all honesty..........IS IT WORTH having a super power company that YES makes 100/1000 of people very very rich, but also gives more than most countries entire national earnings to the needy ?
Yes I think I would take the option of spending £60 on something every 3-5 years........and creating a global company that 'bullies' (relativily VERY rich westners in global terms) into , well taking other jobs, yet gives billions to the needy, id go for that,
ubutus, software for the people looks much less appealing now in that light. Sure us with roofs and food on the table like the idea of it, but software convenience and 'software works in everything but I.E 6' is a small price to pay for people getting something that matters, at the end of the day on a human scale, companies battle it out, and people will still get homes and food regardless, more people who are truely desperate getting something good is a better option.
Basically who gives a flying **** if we have to program a webpage twice, one for 'free software' , one for software that gives billions to the needy....... the 'its the principle it should just work everywhere' argument about web standards just basically nose dives into comparison of what actually matters in life and what matters in the world.........food, water, saftey matters, see what im saying ?
Of course microsoft may give a small % of its total earnings (but I do beleive its still more of a % of its entire company, than other companies, ill find the report) to good causes............and without microsoft taking over everything, bill gates would not of had the recources to give , what he has given, im keeping a close eye on him after he retires from microsoft, I can only predict from his previous behavior he will acheive great things.
I hope this kind of makes sense, and is defo something to think about
*Dons I read this through twice to remove swearies (I posted this on another forum also), and im 99% sure I removed them all, so please just *** out any I may of missed, I did check as best I could
Just had a random realisation, microsoft, everyone moans about them, taking over the industry, bulling other companies and all that, and charging and become the richest company on the planet nearly.
The idea to westerners of linux as an honest and free for all system makes sense on the surface as an ethically and good idea, or is it ?
If the world went linux, software would be free, companies would be 'free' and all would be well, would it ?
I cant help thinking, in short, yes microsoft 'destroy' or buy out other companies that displease them or are a competator, however the people working for these other companies either get big payouts, become part of microsoft or go onto other jobs, they certanly don't become homeless or die of starvation.
Now I cant help not notice, bill gates has given $15 billion of his own money to good causes, and helping the needy, microsoft and its other executives have no doubt given more than me or joe naverage will earn in there lifetimes to good causes.
Gates has now given the rest of his life to making sure needy people get aid and not just some money as most other charities do, (I've noticed a lot of reports of charities using most of the donations to keep them running instead of it going to the needy)
So what im trying to say is........the people like me and u who own and buy windows vista or whatever, who lets be honest, WONT die if we spend £60 for something we use contstantly, who YES may get annoyed at some of the annoyances it throws up.........but no more than linux or any other OS in all honesty..........IS IT WORTH having a super power company that YES makes 100/1000 of people very very rich, but also gives more than most countries entire national earnings to the needy ?
Yes I think I would take the option of spending £60 on something every 3-5 years........and creating a global company that 'bullies' (relativily VERY rich westners in global terms) into , well taking other jobs, yet gives billions to the needy, id go for that,
ubutus, software for the people looks much less appealing now in that light. Sure us with roofs and food on the table like the idea of it, but software convenience and 'software works in everything but I.E 6' is a small price to pay for people getting something that matters, at the end of the day on a human scale, companies battle it out, and people will still get homes and food regardless, more people who are truely desperate getting something good is a better option.
Basically who gives a flying **** if we have to program a webpage twice, one for 'free software' , one for software that gives billions to the needy....... the 'its the principle it should just work everywhere' argument about web standards just basically nose dives into comparison of what actually matters in life and what matters in the world.........food, water, saftey matters, see what im saying ?
Of course microsoft may give a small % of its total earnings (but I do beleive its still more of a % of its entire company, than other companies, ill find the report) to good causes............and without microsoft taking over everything, bill gates would not of had the recources to give , what he has given, im keeping a close eye on him after he retires from microsoft, I can only predict from his previous behavior he will acheive great things.
I hope this kind of makes sense, and is defo something to think about
*Dons I read this through twice to remove swearies (I posted this on another forum also), and im 99% sure I removed them all, so please just *** out any I may of missed, I did check as best I could
Last edited: