«

begin Roy Culley , wrote in message
viq73-:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4552214.stm
>
> The European Commission has threatened to fine Microsoft up to 2m
> euros ($2.4m) a day until it gives rivals more access to its
> operating systems.

Why should it have to?

> Brussels said the software giant had failed to supply adequate
> information about its server programmes.

How convenient? Don't state exactly what should be documented, then find
that whatever is supplied as inadequate. [Everybody want to see your demise,
please provide a blank cheque]

> Microsoft has five weeks to provide improved documentation before
> the daily penalties are imposed.
>
> The EU said it was "left with no alternative" after giving
> Microsoft every chance to comply with its ruling.

Such moves, coercions, and exhaustion by the EU, will be found illegal acts
of revenue raising and attempts of dispossessing an owner of it right to
peaceful and quiet enjoyment of it property. The EU will be discredited as
thieves in pursuit of a cabal.

Nothing more than machination of the envious.

--
What makes a person doubt you is the horror at the thought they may be
wrong.

On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 02:32:41 -1100, FUD wrote:

> begin Roy Culley , wrote in message
> viq73-:
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4552214.stm
>>
>> The European Commission has threatened to fine Microsoft up to 2m
>> euros ($2.4m) a day until it gives rivals more access to its
>> operating systems.
>
> Why should it have to?

Because the court said so.

>
>> Brussels said the software giant had failed to supply adequate
>> information about its server programmes.
>
> How convenient? Don't state exactly what should be documented, then find
> that whatever is supplied as inadequate. [Everybody want to see your
> demise, please provide a blank cheque]

Your premise is flawed.

>
>> Microsoft has five weeks to provide improved documentation before the
>> daily penalties are imposed.
>>
>> The EU said it was "left with no alternative" after giving Microsoft
>> every chance to comply with its ruling.
>
> Such moves, coercions, and exhaustion by the EU, will be found illegal
> acts of revenue raising and attempts of dispossessing an owner of it right
> to peaceful and quiet enjoyment of it property. The EU will be discredited
> as thieves in pursuit of a cabal.

In your pro-micro$oft opinion.

>
> Nothing more than machination of the envious.

--
Rick

begin virus.txt.scr FUD wrote:

> begin Roy Culley , wrote in message
> viq73-:
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4552214.stm
>>
>> The European Commission has threatened to fine Microsoft up to 2m
>> euros ($2.4m) a day until it gives rivals more access to its
>> operating systems.
>
> Why should it have to?
>
>> Brussels said the software giant had failed to supply adequate
>> information about its server programmes.
>
> How convenient? Don't state exactly what should be documented, then find
> that whatever is supplied as inadequate. [Everybody want to see your
> demise, please provide a blank cheque]
>
>> Microsoft has five weeks to provide improved documentation before
>> the daily penalties are imposed.
>>
>> The EU said it was "left with no alternative" after giving
>> Microsoft every chance to comply with its ruling.
>
> Such moves, coercions, and exhaustion by the EU, will be found illegal
> acts of revenue raising and attempts of dispossessing an owner of it right
> to peaceful and quiet enjoyment of it property. The EU will be discredited
> as thieves in pursuit of a cabal.
>
> Nothing more than machination of the envious.
>

Idiot
--
If ignorance is bliss, why aren't there more happy people?

Peter =?UTF-8?B?S8O2aGxtYW5u?= <> wrote:

> is sex good?

On Thursday 22 December 2005 13:32 FUD wrote:

>> The EU said it was "left with no alternative" after giving
>> Microsoft every chance to comply with its ruling.
>
> Such moves, coercions, and exhaustion by the EU, will be found illegal
> acts of revenue raising and attempts of dispossessing an owner of it right
> to peaceful and quiet enjoyment of it property. The EU will be discredited
> as thieves in pursuit of a cabal.

I don't think so.
In fact, it looks as though the E.U. is actually doing what the U.S. courts
should have done, and would have done were it not for the fact that the
U.S. is now pretty-well controlled by the large corporations...

In any event, the way things are going means that there can be one of only
three possible outcomes:-

1. Microsoft can comply with the law

2. Microsoft can go bust.

3. Microsoft can cease to vend its goods in the E.U.

Microsoft is quite free to make its choice.

__/ [Rick] on Thursday 22 December 2005 14:36 \__

> On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 02:32:41 -1100, FUD wrote:
>
>> begin Roy Culley , wrote in message
>> viq73-:
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4552214.stm
>>>
>>> The European Commission has threatened to fine Microsoft up to 2m
>>> euros ($2.4m) a day until it gives rivals more access to its
>>> operating systems.
>>
>> Why should it have to?
>
> Because the court said so.


....and because practices adopted by Microsoft are intended to cripple the
rival rather than offer added value.


>>> Brussels said the software giant had failed to supply adequate
>>> information about its server programmes.
>>
>> How convenient? Don't state exactly what should be documented, then find
>> that whatever is supplied as inadequate. [Everybody want to see your
>> demise, please provide a blank cheque]
>
> Your premise is flawed.


What premise? He's pulling this out of his bottom.


>>> Microsoft has five weeks to provide improved documentation before the
>>> daily penalties are imposed.
>>>
>>> The EU said it was "left with no alternative" after giving Microsoft
>>> every chance to comply with its ruling.
>>
>> Such moves, coercions, and exhaustion by the EU, will be found illegal
>> acts of revenue raising and attempts of dispossessing an owner of it right
>> to peaceful and quiet enjoyment of it property. The EU will be discredited
>> as thieves in pursuit of a cabal.
>
> In your pro-micro$oft opinion.
>
>>
>> Nothing more than machination of the envious.


Read the article again. The EU is trying to run servers that are better and
enable them to communicate with those pretentious machines that refuse to
say a word. It sounds like close-source vanity or discrimination to me.

Roy

--
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Have you compiled your kernel today?"
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
4:05pm up 11 days 23:16, 7 users, load average: 0.64, 0.50, 0.46
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms

"B Gruff" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Thursday 22 December 2005 13:32 FUD wrote:
>
>>> The EU said it was "left with no alternative" after giving
>>> Microsoft every chance to comply with its ruling.
>>
>> Such moves, coercions, and exhaustion by the EU, will be found
>> illegal
>> acts of revenue raising and attempts of dispossessing an owner of it
>> right
>> to peaceful and quiet enjoyment of it property. The EU will be
>> discredited
>> as thieves in pursuit of a cabal.
>
> I don't think so.
> In fact, it looks as though the E.U. is actually doing what the U.S.
> courts
> should have done, and would have done were it not for the fact that
> the
> U.S. is now pretty-well controlled by the large corporations...
>
> In any event, the way things are going means that there can be one of
> only
> three possible outcomes:-
>
> 1. Microsoft can comply with the law
>
> 2. Microsoft can go bust.
>
> 3. Microsoft can cease to vend its goods in the E.U.
>
> Microsoft is quite free to make its choice.
>
Well, goat, the appeal hasn't been heard yet, so there is still some
chance that the EU will have to get in line. You may find the USA
opposing the action, too. In a stand up fight, who do you think would
win?

It is interesting to see that the EU doesn't consider the competing
systems to have any merit on their own, though. How do you reconcile
that? No one can add any value unless they work with Windows, is the
theory, so Windows has to turn loose of any an all information and it
has to be explained so that the other can comprehend it. A tall order
since the competitors have demonstrated an adversity to learning
anything new! LOL!!!

B Gruff wrote:
> On Thursday 22 December 2005 13:32 FUD wrote:
>
>>> The EU said it was "left with no alternative" after giving
>>> Microsoft every chance to comply with its ruling.
>>
>> Such moves, coercions, and exhaustion by the EU, will be found
>> illegal acts of revenue raising and attempts of dispossessing an
>> owner of it right to peaceful and quiet enjoyment of it property.
>> The EU will be discredited as thieves in pursuit of a cabal.
>
> I don't think so.
> In fact, it looks as though the E.U. is actually doing what the U.S.
> courts should have done, and would have done were it not for the fact
> that the U.S. is now pretty-well controlled by the large
> corporations...
>
> In any event, the way things are going means that there can be one of
> only three possible outcomes:-
>
> 1. Microsoft can comply with the law
>
> 2. Microsoft can go bust.
>
> 3. Microsoft can cease to vend its goods in the E.U.
>
> Microsoft is quite free to make its choice.

Opt for '3' and wait for the uproar of the people.

Peter =?UTF-8?B?S8O2aGxtYW5u?= <> wrote:

> I was wondering about emancipation at the age of 12. Is that
> possible??? Where can I get information about it??? And do your parents
> have to consent to it???

Peter =?UTF-8?B?S8O2aGxtYW5u?= <> wrote:

> I have a tube hanging out of my chest, which is draining blood from my
> collapsed lung, after having been inserted without the aid of
> anaesthetic.