Re: AM-INFO digest 593

[Steve Cohen <stevecoh@mcs.com>]

Wandered Inn wrote:

> Allan Bazar wrote:
> >
> > When I was a boy in college (40 + years ago) the tobacco
> > companies would hire students to pass out cigarettes;
>
> Not valid, you're being hired by the company to do a job, not the same
> comparison.
>
> > insurance
> > companies maintained liaison with university administrators who
> > promoted their wares; textbook publishers maintained a number of
> > contacts not to dissimilar to M$'s.
>
> Maintaining contacts is not the same as flooding an educational facility
> with free software, with the expectation that the educational facility
> will begin to slant their 'wares' in favor of the providing company.
>
> >
> > The argument could be made that M$ is a monopoly......... etc.
> > etc.  which may be relevant but the practice  is, as the
> > participants in this list have shown time and time again, as is
> > typical for M$, neither novel nor original.
>
> Again, apples to oranges comparisons...
>
> >
> > Mark Hinds wrote:
> >
> > > I have included a page below which seems to be yet another
> > > instance of MS invading the universities with their
> > > technology hype. I've have never seen this kind of blatant
> > > educational interference from any other Corp than MS. Am I
> > > just cracked for think this is so bad? Brett, I know you think
> > > I don't have a living brain :-), but surely you find this
> > > objectionable.
> > >
> > > A question for Simon the MS employee:
> > > Do you personally find this acceptable?
> > > How do you explain this degree of intrusion into higher
> > > education?
> > > Does my objection to it qualify me as and unreasonable
> > > religious zealot?
> > >
> > >
> > > Program Manager - Research - Redmond, WA
> > >
> > > http://www.axxa.com/position/93793.asp
> > >
>
> --
> Until later: Geoffrey           esoteric@denali.atlnet.com
>
> You mean you paid MONEY for Service Pack '98????

I would say that you're both right in a sense.  Allan is right that
companies have been doing this for awhile.  Geoffrey is right in that
Allan's example isn't at all germane.  On the other hand, however, you'd
probably better believe that if Weyerhauser or Georgia Pacific endows a
faculty position in environmental science at some university, ain't no "tree
huggers" going to be filling it. Etc.  And if General Motors endows a
position, the holder of it probably isn't going to be active in the movement
to stop global warming.  Much more likely the contrary.

This isn't all that different - and yet part of me wants to say it is.  As
Dan points out in his reply, Microsoft "has long sought to inhibit
understanding of computers and spread misinformation about computer
technology."  They are systematically uprooting much of computer science.
It would be as if Sydney Omarr funded a chair in Astronomy at some
university.  But on thinking about it, the only difference I can see in
these cases is that I have more knowledge of computer science, have expended
more effort in learning it, and therefore have more personal stake.
Objectively, there really isn't a difference.  All of these incidents are
standard corporate operating procedure, perfectly legal, and totally
disgusting.