IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Great gem on the cost of a Microsoft "forced upgrade"

Google serendipity finds [link|http://www.nclug.org/pipermail/nclug/2001-November/002278.html|Why Linux will win and Micro$oft will lose] by Kirk Rheinlander:

\r\n\r\n
\r\n
\r\n...\r\n\r\nI sat across the table from Microsoft as they forced a large multi-national \r\noil company to eliminate all the Novell servers, and move to NT, as \r\nMicro$oft refused to sell them 260,000 upgraded copies of Windows and \r\nOffice unless they did so. By replacing the 1,600 unattended Novell servers \r\non oil rigs in places like the North Sea, it only required the purchase of \r\na half-dozen of so helicopters to ferry technicians out to the oil rigs to \r\nreboot and maintain the NT servers.\r\n\r\nBUT THAT WAS CHEAP!!\r\n\r\nCompared with:\r\n  - Retraining 260,000 employees\r\n  - Retraining thousands of IT staff\r\n  - Introducing and training users on new applications\r\n  - Dealing with data incompatibility issues with non-Microsoft applications \r\n    that are the de-facto-standard with the companies that they interact with\r\n  - Supporting a global staff in a new environment\r\n  - Transitioning 260,000 desktops, reimaging drives, etc.\r\n  - Translating literally billions of files from existing formats\r\n  - Supporting 2 environments during the transition\r\n  - etc., etc., etc.\r\n\r\nThe $100M they gave to Micro$oft (plus the cost of the helicopters) was \r\ncheap compared to moving to the "free" Linux world.\r\n\r\n...\r\n
--\r\n
Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n
[link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n
[link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n
\r\n
   Keep software free.     Oppose the CBDTPA.     Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n
New Read "Information Rules"
This is exactly how an effective business should take advantage of a large installed base with large lock-in costs when growth is no longer an option.

Slowly turn up the heat until each victi^Wcustomer reaches their pain tolerance and switches. Along the way do the best that you can to constantly raise switching costs so you will be able to turn the thumbscrews even more.

Cheers,
Ben
"good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not"
- [link|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html|Stefano Mazzocchi]
New Re: Great gem on the cost of a Microsoft "forced upgrade"
I find elements of this tale of woe tax credulity
unless verified in some way

A
Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://wxxe.org|Tune In]
New And what sort of verification would you have in mind?

Frankly, this fits with the pattern of dirty tricks attributed to Microsoft, many of which come from court documents.

--\r\n
Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n
[link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n
[link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n
\r\n
   Keep software free.     Oppose the CBDTPA.     Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n
New Re: And what sort of verification would you have in mind?
elements that tax credulity:

retraining 260,000 employees -- for upgrades to Windows and Office, is the company I work for the only one that installs these upgrades without needing to retrain, somehow I doubt it. There are many office workers here who have gone from NT to 2000 to XP without a single session not to mention going up the ladder of Office versions

literally billions of files that needed translating from existing formats -- very doubtful -- does this require further explanation?

transitioning 260,000 desktops -- this does not belong on the litany of complaints -- the company had decided to this already, regardless of the Novell-NT issue

Dealing with data incompatibility issues with non-Microsoft applications
that are the de-facto-standard with the companies that they interact with -- this too is part of the decision to upgrade Windows and Office discussed in the original article, there must have been a reason for the upgrade


Anyway: this incident is out of the past otherwise MS would have insisted on Windows 2000 Advanced Server or if the other day WIndows Server 2003. I have no idea whether MS uses this form of 'marketing' today (that is not on the curriculum at Shill Tech) or whether they used it in the first place
I wonder what the definition of 'forced' is, in this case?
Was it just the offer of a lower price if the NT servers were included?
Was there an MS compliance officer who witnessed the dismantling of all Novell servers?

A

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://wxxe.org|Tune In]
New I no longer want to play ...
... [link|http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame21.html|this guy] to your [link|http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame84.html|this guy].
===

Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
New The costs you cite are the costs
of adopting a competing office suite. Compared to that, upgrading to MS is cheap. Or, do you say that changing the office suite does not require retraining and conversion of documents?
--

OK, George W. is deceptive to be sure. Dissembling, too. And let's not forget deceitful. He is lacking veracity and frankness, and void of sooth, though seemingly sincere in his proclivity for pretense. But he did not lie.
[link|http://www.jointhebushwhackers.com/not_a_liar.cfm|Brian Wimer]
New Taxing credulity
\r\nelements that tax credulity:\r\n
\r\n\r\n

I agree absolutely. [link|http://aaxnet.com/topics/msinc.html|Microsoft's documented\r\nillegal behavior track record from 1982 through 2002 taxes\r\ncredulity]. Your point?

\r\n\r\n

While Kirk will vouch for his story (ask him yourself, I have), his\r\nnondisclosure prevents him from mentioning specifics of the client.

\r\n\r\n
\r\nretraining 260,000 employees -- for upgrades to Windows and Office, is\r\nthe company I work for the only one that installs these upgrades without\r\nneeding to retrain, somehow I doubt it. There are many office workers\r\nhere who have gone from NT to 2000 to XP without a single session not to\r\nmention going up the ladder of Office versions\r\n
\r\n\r\n

And what's your company?

\r\n\r\n

This was a major international oil company. From context, I gather\r\nthe company was forced either to make major upgrades in MSFT office\r\nproducts, or switch from another vendors' office products. I don't have\r\nspecifics on this. I'm asking for clarification.

\r\n\r\n
\r\nliterally billions of files that needed translating from existing\r\nformats -- very doubtful -- does this require further explanation?\r\n
\r\n\r\n

That's on the order of 4,000 documents per employee. With file\r\nproliferation and a complex operation, that's a credible figure.

\r\n\r\n
\r\ntransitioning 260,000 desktops -- this does not belong on the litany of\r\ncomplaints -- the company had decided to this already, regardless of the\r\nNovell-NT issue\r\n
\r\n\r\n

No, and this is important, so I'll type slowly for you:

\r\n\r\n
\r\nThe company had no choice but to make the upgrade. Microsoft\r\n"forced a large multi-national oil company to eliminate all the Novell\r\nservers, and move to NT, as Micro$oft refused to sell them 260,000\r\nupgraded copies of legacy MS Windows and Office unless they did\r\nso." What part of illegal coercion don't you understand? \r\n
\r\n\r\n
\r\nDealing with data incompatibility issues with non-Microsoft applications\r\nthat are the de-facto-standard with the companies that they interact\r\nwith -- this too is part of the decision to upgrade Windows and Office\r\ndiscussed in the original article, there must have been a reason for the\r\nupgrade.\r\n
\r\n\r\n

Microsoft "forced a large multi-national oil company to\r\neliminate all the Novell servers, and move to NT, as Micro$oft refused\r\nto sell them 260,000 upgraded copies of legacy MS legacy MS Windows and\r\nOffice unless they did so."

\r\n\r\n\r\n
\r\nAnyway: this incident is out of the past otherwise MS would have\r\ninsisted on Windows 2000 Advanced Server or if the other day Windows\r\nServer 2003. I have no idea whether MS uses this form of 'marketing'\r\ntoday (that is not on the curriculum at Shill Tech) or whether they used\r\nit in the first place I wonder what the definition of 'forced' is, in\r\nthis case? Was it just the offer of a lower price if the NT servers\r\nwere included? Was there an MS compliance officer who witnessed the\r\ndismantling of all Novell servers?\r\n
\r\n\r\n

[link|http://aaxnet.com/topics/msinc.html|Now and then.\r\nNothing's changed.]. Tell you what. Since we've got a [link|http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm|criminal\r\nmonopolist], \r\n\r\na [link|http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/22684.html|stunning cave-in by the DoJ in the final 2001\r\nsettlement] of the antitrust case,\r\n\r\n[link|http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/13514.html|staggering\r\namounts of political contributions from Microsoft] which [link|http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-835267.html|eclipse Enron],\r\n\r\ndefection of numerous state attorneys general, including: \r\n\r\n[link|http://lists.essential.org/1998/am-info/msg07443.html|Charlie\r\nCondon (South Carolina)];\r\n\r\n[link|http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/14214.html|Mark Tobey\r\n(Texas)] ([link|http://slate.msn.com/id/2315/|more]) at the\r\nurging of Dell and Compaq;\r\n\r\nas well as the other settling states, \r\n\r\n[link|http://google.com/?q=microsoft+kentucky|Kentucky],\r\n[link|http://google.com/?q=microsoft+louisiana|Louisiana],\r\n[link|http://google.com/?q=microsoft+maryland|Maryland],\r\n[link|http://google.com/?q=microsoft+michigan|Michigan],\r\n[link|http://google.com/?q=microsoft+new+york|New York],\r\n[link|http://google.com/?q=microsoft+north+carolina|North Carolina],\r\n[link|http://google.com/?q=microsoft+ohio|Ohio], and\r\n[link|http://google.com/?q=microsoft+wisconsin|Wisconsin].\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Of course, if you want to know what behavior's still going on, you'll\r\nhave to crack the [link|http://www.microsoft-antitrust.gov/|Coordinated State Enforcement\r\nof Microsoft Antitrust Judgements website]. There's no report of\r\ncurrent status from this page, unfortunately.

\r\n\r\n\r\n

However we do have that little matter of the [link|http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/29192.html|Sendo\r\ncase] (Microsoft alleged to have misappropriated cell phone trade\r\nsecrets), and a [link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/FUD|metric buttload of FUD] which would indicate a staying of the course.

\r\n\r\n

What's your counter-evidence, Andrea?

\r\n\r\n
--\r\n
Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n
[link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n
[link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n
\r\n
   Keep software free.     Oppose the CBDTPA.     Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n
New Re: Taxing credulity
I wrote:
literally billions of files that needed translating from existing formats -- very doubtful -- does this require further explanation?

Karsten wrote:
That's on the order of 4,000 documents per employee. With file proliferation and a complex operation, that's a credible figure.

I wrote:
transitioning 260,000 desktops -- this does not belong on the litany of complaints -- the company had decided to this already, regardless of the Novell-NT issue

Karsten wrote:
No, and this is important, so I'll type slowly for you:

The company had no choice but to make the upgrade. Microsoft "forced a large multi-national oil company to eliminate all the Novell servers, and move to NT, as Micro$oft refused to sell them 260,000 upgraded copies of legacy MS Windows and Office unless they did so." What part of illegal coercion don't you understand?

end quotes

MS 'refused' to sell upgraded copies of Windows and Office
this implies that they were using Windows and Office (some version or other) already
if this is true this casts doubts on the 'literally billions' of docs needing format translation
using the one, two, many system of counting, this would imply around 12,000 documents per employee
I'm assuming that they were in some Office format or another because of the word 'upgraded' in the original post
even many WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3 etc docs are openable by Office apps so I still doubt the billions

to return to the 260,000 upgraded copies of Office and Windows -- these were what the company wanted to buy, otherwise MS's refusal to sell has no meaning
thus they had already chosen to make changes to 260,000 desktops for their own business reasons -- good or other
therefore the costs associated with that decision can not be blamed on illegal coercion from MS

dumping the Novell servers is really the only issue related to any illegal behavior by MS

As far as I know there are no versions of Windows and Office that prevent use of Novell servers
so they could have bought 1600 NT server licenses and parked them if they didn't want them

You have also ignored the 'form' of the coercion
they 'refused' to sell unless they bought something else
was there a package price?
a discount that swayed management?

A

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://wxxe.org|Tune In]
New Re: Taxing credulity

First: The upgrade was cooerced. There was no option to purchase needed additional licenses without purchasing unnecessary upgrades to all systems. I'll also note that you ask for evidence, then gainsay it. So: you're calling me and Mr. Rheinlander liars? Is that it?

\r\n\r\n

File conversions and retraining costs apply to the option of switching to an alternate office suite / operating environment. This is what would have been incurred Plan B (switching to a non-Microsoft suite and/or OS) were elected. Plan C is, of course, the forced upgrade. Plan A was the option prohibited by Microsoft: retain existing infrastructure and aquire additional software. As the original post makes clear: nuke Novell, purchase 260,000 upgrades, and buy a fleet of helicoptors was cheaper than the option of moving away from Microsoft.

\r\n\r\n

Of course, we wouldn't expect you to read with comprehension.

\r\n\r\n

And you flat out lie: the company did not need to transition 260,000 dekstops. It was attempting to upgrade them and was refused the upgrades unless Novell were banished.

\r\n\r\n

Your comments suggest that forcing aquisition of sufficient numbers of Microsoft server licenses to replace 1,600 Novell instances is somehow acceptable business practices. Is this a valid interpretation of your comments, Andrea? If not, please clarify.

\r\n\r\n

And as a clue to you: [link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/AyeWeeCodes|Wee Codes]. Particularly [quote\\]The quote tag[quote\\]. Or <blockquote type="cite">blockquote</blockquote>.

--\r\n
Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n
[link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n
[link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n
\r\n
   Keep software free.     Oppose the CBDTPA.     Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n
New Re: Taxing credulity
I'll concede the points in the 2nd paragraph of your last post

however when you accuse me of flat out lying that is absurd

the original document said that MS refused to sell them 260,000 upgraded copies of Windows and Office (no legacy word in sight, although that is one of your obsessions)unless....

that statement can only have meaning if that company intended to buy them in the first place

if they intended to buy them in the 1st place, they must have wanted them
if they didn't want them, then MS's refusal to sell wouldn't bother them

the coercion discussed related to dumping Novell
I merely inquired as to the form of the alleged coercion

taken the way you see it, this would be a clearcut example of illegally leveraging the monopoly
much clearer that the stuff about the browser, middleware, Real and other issues that require a great deal of interpretation (and formed the basis of the govt case against MS)

it could be that the co. never reported its victimization to the authorities
anti-MS folks might say they were 'scared' or 'intimidated'
others might say they were bought off

in any case the story is apochryphal or perhaps anecdotal at best

A

you can call me Andrea all you want but I still won't call you Karsie-Warsie

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://wxxe.org|Tune In]
New Umm... that's the point
they wanted the desktops and office, but wanted to keep their novell servers. MSFT refused to sell them the desktops and office unless they also got rid of the novell servers.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton                            jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca]                   [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada               [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
New Concede the points
I'll concede the points in the 2nd paragraph of your last post
\r\n\r\n

I could say that one out of six ain't bad. But I'd be lying.

\r\n\r\n
however when you accuse me of flat out lying that is absurd
\r\n\r\n

It's useful to know, in dealing with you, that "lying" is "truth".

\r\n\r\n
\r\n

the original document said that MS refused to sell them 260,000 upgraded copies of Windows and Office (no legacy word in sight, although that is one of your obsessions)unless....

\r\n\r\n

that statement can only have meaning if that company intended to buy them in the first place

\r\n
\r\n\r\n

Just out of curiosity, and certainly in no expectation of a rational or consistent answer, I'd be curious as to how you interpret the following statement:

\r\n\r\n
\r\n
\r\nI sat across the table from Microsoft as they forced a large multi-national \r\noil company to eliminate all the Novell servers, and move to NT, as \r\nMicro$oft refused to sell them 260,000 upgraded copies of Windows and \r\nOffice unless they did so.\r\n
\r\n
\r\n\r\n
\r\n

if they intended to buy them in the 1st place, they must have wanted them\r\nif they didn't want them, then MS's refusal to sell wouldn't bother them

\r\n\r\n

the coercion discussed related to dumping Novell\r\nI merely inquired as to the form of the alleged coercion<?p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n

The refusal to sell A unless B were also purchased and C eliminated, at an alternative cost of D..

\r\n\r\n
    \r\n
  • A == 260,000 Windows desktops.
  • \r\n
  • B == Windows servers to replace 1,300 Novell servers.
  • \r\n
  • C == 1,300 Novell servers.
  • \r\n
  • D == retraining and migration costs for a quarter-million employees and billions of documents.
  • \r\n
\r\n\r\n
\r\ntaken the way you see it, this would be a clearcut example of illegally leveraging the monopoly\r\n
\r\n\r\n

Indeed. It is.

\r\n\r\n
\r\nit could be that the co. never reported its victimization to the authorities\r\nanti-MS folks might say they were 'scared' or 'intimidated'\r\nothers might say they were bought off\r\n
\r\n\r\n

...or all of the above. Microsoft's sales literature is replete with references to selling to decisionmakers, not technical staff. [link|http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/business/97/10/23/compaq-microsoft.2-0.html|And threatening customers with withholding products or preferential licensing term].

\r\n\r\n
\r\nin any case the story is apochryphal or perhaps anecdotal at best\r\n
\r\n\r\n

Another lie. It's [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=123498|substantially documented and independently verified].

\r\n\r\n
\r\nyou can call me Andrea all you want but I still won't call you Karsie-Warsie\r\n
\r\n\r\n

Ain't it the damnedest thing when you can tell someone the truth, rub their nose in it, document it, substantiate it, repeatedly, endlessly, and they still insist on getting it wrong? Innit it, Andrea?

--\r\n
Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n
[link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n
[link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n
\r\n
   Keep software free.     Oppose the CBDTPA.     Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n
New Re: Concede the points
an\ufffdec\ufffddot\ufffdal ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nk-dtl)
adj.
also an\ufffdec\ufffddot\ufffdic (-dtk) or an\ufffdec\ufffddot\ufffdi\ufffdcal (--kl) Of, characterized by, or full of anecdotes.
Based on casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis: \ufffdThere are anecdotal reports of children poisoned by hot dogs roasted over a fire of the [oleander] stems\ufffd (C. Claiborne Ray).


as in 'I sat across the table.....'

for the xth and last time, I never denied your hysterical ravings about coercion, I merely have inquired as to the form.
repeating the word 'forced' is insufficient
what form did this 'forcing' take?

you also fail to understand the point that the oil company wished to purchase something from MS ( I know this goes against your worldview, where no one wants to buy anything from MS )
that is the only point I made in regard to the 260,000 desktops -- that the company wanted Office and Windows (please don't repeat that MS refused to sell them unless.... - we've got that)

A
Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://wxxe.org|Tune In]
Expand Edited by andread Nov. 10, 2003, 10:11:49 AM EST
New Eyewitness testimony

...is apparently what you call "anecdotes".

\r\n\r\n

Kirk was there. You were not. The verifiable components of his story check out. Burden of proof is for you to show that there is a conflict.

\r\n\r\n

The remainder of your comments have been addressed and dismissed or disproved at least three times. I invoke [link|http://www.4reference.net/encyclopedias/wikipedia/Khendon_s_Law.html|Khendon's Law].

--\r\n
Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n
[link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n
[link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n
\r\n
   Keep software free.     Oppose the CBDTPA.     Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n
New Quit playing dumb already!
The costs you're disputiing are the costs of replacing MS with non-MS office solution.
You keep imagining that those are costs of upgrade to new version of MS Office. NOOOO. Those are money to pay if they decide to change, say, to Open Office.

Because the cost is so high, they are willing to invest in new hardware. And get rid of Novell. Even though getting rid of Novell would mean accuiring a few helicopters to ferry windows administartors around. Comparing to the cost of keeping Novell (and abandoning Microsoft) this is peanuts.

And yes, you are right: the only illegal part of this picture is MS refusing to sell upgrade unless Novell is out.
--

The rich, as usual, are employing the elected.
-- [link|http://unfit2print.blogspot.com/|http://unfit2print.blogspot.com/]
New Re: Quit playing dumb already!
You guys are missing the point. The needs of business could be met with Windows 3.1 Write, Notepad, perhaps PowerPoint from Office 4.3, and for the true power user, Access 2.0. I've still only experienced a single case of a person using Word to anything like its capability - and that was in 1994.

The office tools that come with, say SuSE 8.2, are more than sufficient for any business need. There would be no cost for retraining - file/open/save/print/forward etc. etc.
-drl
New Capabilities

In one of the follow-on documents, apparently Win98 didn't "support" the e-procurement apps BP was considering. How the fsck they failed support isn't particularly clear. But that still only covers the desktop. No need to toss Novell. Though that's clearly what happened.

--\r\n
Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n
[link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n
[link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n
\r\n
   Keep software free.     Oppose the CBDTPA.     Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n
New Much as I would like to agree with you,
I do have to use Word 97 at least to do my documents. Things like outline mode and diagrams really help. And for sending things up for reviews, change highlighting is very valuable.

Write for Windows 3.1 meets the needs of business users like a spear meets the need of a hunter: it's possible to kill a boar, but boy, it's not pretty.
--

The rich, as usual, are employing the elected.
-- [link|http://unfit2print.blogspot.com/|http://unfit2print.blogspot.com/]
New well exCUUUSE ME! OK, OK, Word 97!
I'll cop to that upgrade!
-drl
New Yeah, sure.
But you're not a Microsoft shill.

Oh no, not you. Never!





Yeah, right.


   [link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)
Resident [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=119792|zIWETHEY pilkunnussija]
New You know I'm not one.
But whatever happened to "Just Say No"?
bcnu,
Mikem

The soul and substance of what customarily ranks as patriotism is moral cowardice and always has been...We have thrown away the most valuable asset we had-- the individual's right to oppose both flag and country when he (just he, by himself) believed them to be in the wrong. We have thrown it away; and with it all that was really respectable about that grotesque and laughable word, Patriotism.

- Mark Twain, "Monarchical and Republican Patriotism"
New Probable scenario match

UK-based [link|http://www.bp.com/|BP] merged with US-based Amaco in 1999 (though there were several other mergers near the same time. [link|http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=BP|Yahoo finance's BP profile] shows a good match on employee count. While I don't know that this is the company discussed in the post above, several facts match. Rheinlander also lists BP-Amaco in the originally referenced post as a prior assignment.

\r\n\r\n

And here's the [link|http://www.aviationtoday.com/reports/rotorwing/previous/0700/07rotorcraft.htm|six Super Pumas aquired at a cost of $350,000 to $450,000 per month, per aircraft]. That's another $57.6m over the two year span of the systemwide upgrade.

\r\n\r\n

Microsoft makes much of this in a case study, [link|http://www.microsoft.com/resources/casestudies/CaseStudy.asp?CaseStudyID=12232|After Major Merger, BP Chooses Windows 2000 as Common Operating Environment] (for some reason the phrase "BP was conscious that time was running out on the Windows 95 platform" stands out -- make me an offer I can't refuse?). These guys don't just screw people over, they brag about it afterwards. Subsequently, BP's invested in a [link|http://news.com.com/2100-1010-997862.html|large Linux-based Itanium cluster] for [link|http://www.vnunet.com/News/1140457|seismic research] and [link|http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-828802.html|3,000 Linux servers] for gas stations, because "What are the odds that if that machine goes down in a gas station there's going to be somebody in 50 miles that can get it working again? And the answer is there just isn't one. Reliability is everything to these guys."

\r\n\r\n

Looks like that fits with the "we got screwed, we're trying Linux in appropriate tasks, and are open to expanding that role" conveyed by the original post and my followup discussions with Mr. Rheinlander.

\r\n\r\n

Edits: title change, additional background.

--\r\n
Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n
[link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n
[link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n
\r\n
   Keep software free.     Oppose the CBDTPA.     Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n
Expand Edited by kmself Oct. 30, 2003, 09:35:48 PM EST
Expand Edited by kmself Oct. 30, 2003, 09:37:33 PM EST
Expand Edited by kmself Oct. 30, 2003, 10:16:44 PM EST
     Great gem on the cost of a Microsoft "forced upgrade" - (kmself) - (22)
         Read "Information Rules" - (ben_tilly)
         Re: Great gem on the cost of a Microsoft "forced upgrade" - (andread) - (19)
             And what sort of verification would you have in mind? - (kmself) - (16)
                 Re: And what sort of verification would you have in mind? - (andread) - (15)
                     I no longer want to play ... - (drewk)
                     The costs you cite are the costs - (Arkadiy)
                     Taxing credulity - (kmself) - (12)
                         Re: Taxing credulity - (andread) - (11)
                             Re: Taxing credulity - (kmself) - (5)
                                 Re: Taxing credulity - (andread) - (4)
                                     Umm... that's the point - (jake123)
                                     Concede the points - (kmself) - (2)
                                         Re: Concede the points - (andread) - (1)
                                             Eyewitness testimony - (kmself)
                             Quit playing dumb already! - (Arkadiy) - (4)
                                 Re: Quit playing dumb already! - (deSitter) - (3)
                                     Capabilities - (kmself)
                                     Much as I would like to agree with you, - (Arkadiy) - (1)
                                         well exCUUUSE ME! OK, OK, Word 97! - (deSitter)
             Yeah, sure. - (CRConrad) - (1)
                 You know I'm not one. - (mmoffitt)
         Probable scenario match - (kmself)

Don’t look at me in that tone of voice!
88 ms