Comments on: Microsoft doesn’t want world peace

By: Cha Guerilla

Cha Guerilla — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 00:20:01 +0000

Well, Nick, I agree with you, but think about it from their perspective. Microsoft and Intel are businesses, and some other organization tried to enter a new market before the big boys could. This other organization, in addition to preempting Big Co., would also significantly undercut them in terms of price. That sounds like competition, even if it is a fairly altruistic nonprofit.

It’s the old ‘to a hammer, everything looks like a nail’ cliche. Or, as I prefer to say, if you’re crazy, and you have a hammer, everyone’s face looks like a big nail.

By: Nick

Nick — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:06:54 +0000

To put it in a more succinct thought: It’s weird that big multi-billion dollar corporations consider a nonprofit a threat and competition.

By: Nick

Nick — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:05:06 +0000

The Third World presents a huge, untapped market for Intel and Microsoft. Just as I’m sure they are trying to rapidly expand in India and China — and capture some of the success other American companies have experienced in those nations — these less-developed countries could be another source of growth.

It’s obviously a conflict of ideals: One Laptop Per Child represents idealism, and Microsoft/Intel want market share and money. And yet it shows how Microsoft still does not get open source and how this might lead to its demise.

I sure have a hard time feeling warm and bubbly over companies that try to crush a nonprofit’s efforts to expand technology in poor, underdeveloped Third World countries.

By: Fotografo

Fotografo — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:58:06 +0000

Nice article. Thanks.
I believe that instruction and acessibility to information are really important.
Instruction let us dvide important things from other.