[Am-info] Wal-Mart [WAS: The Wallmart PC]

[Erick Andrews]

On Fri, 01 Mar 2002 18:22:51 -0800, T.Guilbert wrote:

>In a message dated 2002 March 01 (Friday), timestamp 03:42 PM, 
>   on the topic [Am-info] The Wallmart PC,
>   John Poltorak <jp@eyup.org> wrote:
>
>
>"|Does anyone know if Microsoft has attempted to use any strong arm
>"|tactics  to prevent Wallmart selling their 'naked' PC?
>
>"|At one point Microsoft wanted people to 'turn in' any PC suppliers 
>"|offering PC without Windows pre-installed. I can't believe they have
>"| allowed Wallmart to get away with such scurrilous behaviour without
>"| threatening them with some sort of legal action.
>
>Microsoft never had any basis to bring a legal action against a
>hardware vendor who (1) was not a Microsoft licensee, and (2) was not
>selling (or aiding others to sell) illegally copied or grey market
>Microsoft software.  Commonly the threat to hardware vendos was:  if
>you sell 10,000 PCs with Microsoft installed, your per-processor
>charge is X dollars, total Microsoft tax:  10,000x.  if you sell 9,999
>PCs with Microsoft installed, and one PC bare or with another OS, your
>per-processor charge is (X+Y), total Microsoft tax:  9,999(X+Y). 
>

What the definition of "Y" here?   Some fraction of "X"?

If so, would you know if it's typically greater or less than 1?

-- 
Erick Andrews