On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:06:18 +0000, Kier wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 08:08:33 +0000, Mark Kent wrote:
>
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> ____/ Kier on Wednesday 16 January 2008 17:21 : \____
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:02:53 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ____/ Kier on Wednesday 16 January 2008 16:53 : \____
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:34:47 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ____/ Kier on Wednesday 16 January 2008 10:06 : \____
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:00:31 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Two separate and independent sources said it was well over 100 million.
>>>>>>>>> I think the BBC is now trying to bend the definitions as it came up with
>>>>>>>>> a new figures that those responsible spit out in their blog (and mine)
>>>>>>>>> while attempting to remain consistent wrt the numbers. They used a
>>>>>>>>> subset of the whole to change the figure for all I can tell. By the way,
>>>>>>>>> the BBC published an article praising (its own) iPlayer yesterday. It
>>>>>>>>> boasted one million users (none of whom uses a Mac of Linux).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If they were counting the streaming player in with that, then yes, there
>>>>>>>> were Linux users in that total - I was one of them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think they counted one million for the download/P2P service. That was in
>>>>>>> a BBC, which is separate from the report in the Register. They use their
>>>>>>> editorial control in the BBC site to defend/hide their corruption, IMHO.
>>>>>>> It's
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *What* corruption? Jesus, Roy, you can't go on saying stuff like this
>>>>>> without proper evidence.
>>>>>
>>>>> c/f OP. It's right there in details. Shall you require more compelling set
>>>>> of coincidence, I shall happily provide them.
>>> ^s
>>>
>>>> If coincidence is all you've got, you'd better stop posting this stuff.
>>>> You need real proof, not some coincidences.
>>>
>>> If you're asking me for some E-mail from Ashley or Erik to the General
>>> saying "hey, we should just pick Microsoft," then I can't offer it to you. If
>>> you require dinner bills that show Erik Huggers having many nice evenings with
>>> his former colleagues at Microsoft, I can't offer it. If you want a transcript
>>> of phonecalls from Microsoft to the BBC saying that "nobody uses Linux" or "it
>>> infringes on Microsoft IP," I can't offer that to you.
>>>
>>> Knowing how business works, however, it's clear that the BBC's gut feeling had
>>> a lot to do with friend and partners. It was never about the taxpayer. That's
>>> not just the BBC and it's not just the UK. Microsoft's pattern of briberies,
>>> ecosystem harp (they used to call it "Trust" before the antitrust law came)
>>> and other such things are a case of "either you're with us or you're against
>>> us". The BBC has made it clear that it's not a friend of its columnist Bill
>>> Gates, of Microsoft, Windows and Internet Explorer. Everything else is a
>>> threat to the BBC now. When a government becomes a Microsoft shill, then the
>>> nation is indanger of voluntarily locking itself in to OOXML, Sharepoint, and
>>> so forth. And that's just what's happening. They let Microsoft hijack a
>>> nation.
>>>
>>
>> Does Kier work for the BBC?
>
> Is Mark an idiot or just round the bend?
>
> Of course I don't work for the BBC, you loon! I have in fact stated
> several times on various posts what I do for a living, and is has zero to
> do with the BBC or MS.
Like I said, you are either with them or against them.
The radical Linux 'advocate' will have it no other way.
Get ready for Roy to appear and suck up to you to try and smooth things
over.
Look Kier, you are obviously on to their warped agenda and methods of
madness so why waste your time with them?
|
|
