[Am-info] Corel serves up Windows apps on Linux?

[Erick Andrews]

On Fri, 07 Jan 2000 08:12:53 -0800, Lewis A. Mettler wrote:

>
>
<snip>

>> >
>> >There is absolutely no reason why home computer users must pay for
>> >networking technology.
>> 
>> Yes, I agree.  I think they they should be entitled to pay no more than
>> what non-home computer users pay for it.  Failing the competition
>> of a cheaper package for them sans networking poop in it, they can still
>> vote with their feet.  No monopoly there.  Nothing illegal I can see.
>> No harm given the REAL choices out there, either.
>
>Sorry.  They should have different products to buy. Not be forced to pay
>the same price for the same product.

Oh, I agree.  Never meant to imply otherwise.  Please do understand however,
that price is an entirely different issue.  And in Utopia or in Heaven, pricing
may even be subsidized.  Here on earth it may mean you have a business or not.

>
>Do you want to be all forced to buy the same pair of pants?

No thanks, I could go without pants in that case.  I'll just wear trousers. ;-)

>
>Do you want to be all forced to eat the same food?
>
>Then why in the hell do people suggest that all computer consumers must
>buy the same bundle.

That's an interesting question.  I would speculate that someone well trained
in sociology would give some explanation along the lines of human nature,
not wanting to be different, or even brainwashing.  So what should we do?

>
>That idea is pure stupidity.
>
>No consultant will ever suggest to a client that they must buy and use
>precisely the same solution that everyone else does.  There would be no
>such thing as "consultants" if that were true.

They do come in different shapes and sizes.  The more professional ones
you would expect to propose the most diligent solutions.

>
>Yet. Listen to the crap you read.  "Everyone must buy IE because ...".

Yeah.  It almost makes one bipolar.  But what should we do?

>
>Sorry. But anyone who suggests that consumers should not have
>appropriate choices "according to them" is disqualified in any way to be
>a consultant or advisor in any capacity.  They are only bubblegum
>salesmen.  Rather fraudulent ones at that.

Sure.  The customer is not always right then?  But what should we do?

>
>> 
>> >
>> >There is absolutely no reason why any one should have to pay for
>> >internet technologies either.
>> 
>> I suppose.  I mean I suppose that there is absolutely no reason, and I'm
>> not aware of any law either, that would require us to pay for internet
>> technologies.  Now, as far as the Internet [sic] is concerned, I thought
>> we already paid for it.  Is that your point?
>
>No product needs to be sold to or used by anyone.

I mistrust you are right.

>
>We did not already pay for it at all.  You pay for it when you buy
>Windows.  You pay for it again and again when you buy the Windows
>bundle.
>
>I guess you do not understand the concept of buying products.

If you want to guess, that's your right, I guess.

<snip, snip, snip>

Erick Andrews
Consultant, nutritionally challenged.