Posted by: andrecaldas
on February 28, 2004 08:35 PM
My friend advocate,
I am really amazed on how simplistic you were
able to be in your statements about spam mails.
"But, let's face it, what have open standards gotten us in terms of e-mail? Larger penises? More women?"
It seems that your only problem is that
you don't know who you should blame<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)
Do you really think that the problem was not
solved until now because everybody is just
incompetent? Do you think that it was lack of
technology, and that GOD(M$) suddently decided
to help us and we should be thankful?
Well, when you talk about standards
you mean something that is common to all.
Different applications should "speak the same
language". Creating standards is not only a
matter of finding a solution to a certain
problem. The solution already exists, but it
is useless if it does not become standard.
Why would you prefere an standard owned
by M$ when you can have standards with no
owners?
This is not a matter of "intelectual
property" (patent in this case). M$ is trying
to gain patent rights not as a result of creative
work, but just - as always - using its dominant
position on the software market. If M$ patents
become standard, then you will probably have to
buy "stamps" from them just to KEEP YOUR RIGHT
TO USE A SERVICE M$ DOES NOT OWN.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
How simplistic!!
Posted by: andrecaldas on February 28, 2004 08:35 PMMy friend advocate,
I am really amazed on how simplistic you were
able to be in your statements about spam mails.
"But, let's face it, what have open standards gotten us in terms of e-mail? Larger penises? More women?"
It seems that your only problem is that
you don't know who you should blame<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)
Do you really think that the problem was not
solved until now because everybody is just
incompetent? Do you think that it was lack of
technology, and that GOD(M$) suddently decided
to help us and we should be thankful?
Well, when you talk about standards
you mean something that is common to all.
Different applications should "speak the same
language". Creating standards is not only a
matter of finding a solution to a certain
problem. The solution already exists, but it
is useless if it does not become standard.
Why would you prefere an standard owned
by M$ when you can have standards with no
owners?
This is not a matter of "intelectual
property" (patent in this case). M$ is trying
to gain patent rights not as a result of creative
work, but just - as always - using its dominant
position on the software market. If M$ patents
become standard, then you will probably have to
buy "stamps" from them just to KEEP YOUR RIGHT
TO USE A SERVICE M$ DOES NOT OWN.
#