Rex Ballard wrote:
>
> Microsoft's goal however, is much as I have stated in earlier postings.
>
> Let's say that a big magazine, like Byte, which, when Microsoft first
> started this practice, had a circulation of about 10 million readers
> (most widely read computer magazine at the time), but they kept doing
> comparisons between other systems and Windows 3.1, and Windows 3.1 kept
> losing. They compared it to OS/2 and OS/2 was better. They compared
> it to Solaris and Solaris was better, they compared it to UnixWare, and
> UnixWare was better. They even compared it to Linux, and Linux was
> better. These are disparaging remarks about Windows and Microsoft.
> The Logo usage agreement allows Microsoft to go to every OEM that uses
> the Microsoft logo and tell them, "you can't put ads in Byte anymore,
> because they make disparaging remarks about Microsoft".
>
> Here we have a smoking gun. Yes, the guy has a strong opinion. After
> doing the research, making substantial comparisons between systems, and
> doing some hands-on testing, he posted his opinion, that Microsoft's
> product was not as good as Apple's.
>
> He made this statement without getting Microsoft's prior permission,
> and without letting Microsoft review, and possibly rewrite, the
> article. Net result, he can't use the logo.
>
> Of course, this puts him on the "blacklist" as well. None of the other
> Micrososft advertizers can put their logos in his site, or in his
> publications, either.
Anticompetitive practise against Byte Magazine does make one wonder.
Purchase of newspaper companies by Mr. Gates' philanthropic concerns makes
one wonder. I am hoping that the EU does not buckle under and makes the
right decision in the best interest of the people.
--
HPT
|
|
