Am 26. Jun, 2002 schwätzte Jiva DeVoe so:
> Perhaps instead of spending all this energy on trying to come up with ways
> to fight MS legally (which MS will win anyway) why not spend this energy
I'm not fighting MS. Morgan Stanley actually gives money to companies in the
Free Software community and tries to support competition and free enterprise
( for technology, not so sure they're in favor of competition in their main
areas of business though ).
m$, however, has broken the law multiple times and has finally been found
guilty.
> making Linux the better platform to choose for the applications instead of
> MS? Then you win for the *right reason*.
GNU/Linux already is the better technical platform. Gov't has a need
for standards. Mil requires them. GNU/Linux is much better at standards
compliance than m$ or mac. Don't know how GNU/Linux compares to the
commercial *NIX vendors or the non-commercial *BSDs as far as standards
compliance goes.
> Frankly, I for one cannot in good conscience recommend that Linux is the
> right platform for my children to use in school until Linux has better
I don't remember advocating GNU/Linux or any other OS in that post. I don't
see any such advocation upon rereading it either.
> educational games and is easier to use. And forcing a choice on someone
> because of political motivations is no better than what MS does.
Political motivations? I explicitly mentioned that m$ should be debarred
for illegal activities.
Anderson Consulting looks forward to your continued business and Jimmy Hoffa
thanks you for your vote ;-).
Seriously, the gov't is spending public funds. They should not be supporting
companies participating in illegal activities. Once the company has been
found guilty the gov't has explicit responsibility to not do business with
that company. That is true for any company guilty of a felony or anti-trust
violation.
There are other restrictions on felons. For instance, it is illegal for a
convicted felon to sit on the board for a non-profit corporation. Why
shouldn't m$ and anderson have to suffer the same penalties as their fellow
felons?
I think, at some point the company, with good behavior, will have done its
time and could then be elligible to once again contract with the gov't. In
the meantime, no new contracts.
ciao,
der.hans
> On 6/26/02 1:55 PM, "der.hans" <PLUGd@LuftHans.com> wrote:
>
> > Am 25. Jun, 2002 schwätzte George Toft so:
> >
> >> While searching for more debarment guidelines, I came across these
> >> tidbits:
> >> ===================================================================
> >> Title 7, Ch. 2 Arizona Administrative Code
> >> State Board of Education
> >>
> >> R7-2-1161. Authority to debar or suspend
> >> A. The governing board has the authority to debar or suspend a
> >> person from participating in school district procurements.
> >
> > OK, this says they can debar a company, but doesn't require them to do so.
> >
> > Just looked at your earlier post about Maricopa County rules as well. Those
> > also don't require debarment :(.
> >
> > I would presume this means that m$ isn't automagically debarred, rather only
> > that the gov't now has cause to debar m$ if the gov't so chose. Now we have
> > to convince them to debar m$ for their illegal activities. That's something
> > that should've happened more than 10 years ago the first time m$ was on
> > trial for anti-trust violations. Were they actually convicted that time or
> > did they plea bargain out of it?
> >
> > ciao,
> >
> > der.hans
> >
> >> B. The causes for debarment or suspension include the following:
> >> 3. Conviction or civil judgment finding a violation by any
> >> person or any subsidiary or affiliate of any person under
> >> state or federal antitrust statutes.
> >>
> >> www.mpsaz.org/purchasing/protest.pdf
> >>
> >> Same as before - Schools may debar anti-trust violators.
> >>
> >> ===================================================================
> >> Same thing for ASU:
> >> www.abor.asu.edu/1_the_regents/policymanual/chap3/3-809.pdf (page 11)
> >>
> >> ===================================================================
> >> Same thing for the State:
> >> http://sporas.ad.state.az.us/AZPolicy_art9.htm#Debarment
> >>
> >> ===================================================================
> >>
> >>
> >> Tom Emerson is right - there is not much originality from one government
> >> agency to the next in Arizona - they all pretty much copy the same text
> >> and format.
> >>
> >> Let the letter writing begin!!!
> >>
> >> George
> >> ________________________________________________
> >> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post
> >> to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
> >>
> >> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> >> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >>
>
> ________________________________________________
> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
--
#
https://www.LuftHans.com/
# Don't step in front of speeding cars, don't eat explosives
# and don't use m$ LookOut :). - der.hans
(text/plain)