[Am-info] Chicago Tribune: Ballmer: Proposal would 'debilitate' Microsoft

[Erick Andrews]

On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 18:59:37 -0600, Roy Bixler wrote:

>Ballmer gives his usual hyperbolic viewpoints here, claiming that
>"Jackson was overturned" and that the DOJ-brokered settlement terms
>went beyond what the Appeals Court ruled.  Do any of the more legal
>types on this list have comments on this?
>
>I found his quote:
>
>"We want the Space Shuttle designed so that any part can be taken out,
>and it'll still fly, and it'll fly right. Oh, and any part should be
>able to be replaced. See that screw? That screw has got to be able to
>be arbitrarily replaced. And no astronaut has to be in any jeopardy."

[...]

Not the legal type, me.  

However, that Space Shuttle statement by Ballmer betrays that he 
sure as heck is no engineer type.  No way.  He couldn't even 
'feed the monkey' ;-(

Harvard may have had good engineering courses when he attended,
but no one I remember at Tech in the '60's/'70's would talk in any 
such terms, seriously, glibly about having such interchangeable parts...
parts that are more like Ballmer's mouth and his a******.

Ballmer seems to be mired on cloud nine with his rhetoric, and
I wish more profound people would publicly put him in his place
with substance.

Maybe Jackson was the last who felt so and tried to do so.

-- 
Erick Andrews