[Am-info] Re: adopting alternative OSes

[madodel@ptdprolog.net]

In <0E27E240-798B-11D7-A9AF-003065A24662@accidentalexpert.com>, on
04/28/03 at 08:06 AM,
   Mitch Stone <mitch@accidentalexpert.com> said:

>Again, I think we all know this history. The tech media also was (and 
>still is) virulently anti-Apple. The big difference is that Apple stuck 
>by its guns, and even through the years of less than stellar  management,
>resisted the many calls for them to give up on offering  alternatives to
>Microsoft -- even though it would have been easier for  them to take that
>route instead of the one less traveled. IBM had  opportunities at least
>equal to Apple, and far greater resources with  which to pull them off.
>But they elected to do the safe thing instead  of the bold one.

I think what you keep missing is that a company like Apple or Microsoft
has pretty much one direction to follow.  Can you imagine a Marketing VP
at Apple telling a 10,000+ seat client that they would be better off
buying PCs instead of Apples, or someone at Microsoft suggesting that
OpenOffice would be a better idea then m$Office?  But that is what
happened/happens in IBM.  


Mark

-- 

 From the eComStation Desktop of: Mark Dodel

Warpstock 2002, In the home of OS/2 - Austin, Texas.  Were you there?   http://www.warpstock.org

For a choice in the future of personal computing, Join VOICE - http://www.os2voice.org

  "The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself.   That in it's essence, is Fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Message proposing the Monopoly Investigation, 1938