Subj : XP Home -> XP Pro
To   : Tom Walker
From : Robert Couture
Date : Thu Nov 18 2004 08:06 pm

Tom Walker -> Jay Emrie wrote:

 TW>  And those that do were FORCED to do so becasue of the rising cost of
 TW> providing NO Cont smal lpatches. Or i nthe case of the AntiVirus the
 TW> rappid increase of Virus writers requires an ever increasing Manpower
 TW> expenditure in the Battle. That is VERY costly in Manhours for the
 TW> Programers.
 TW> But the topick of discussion is wether the cost of the Windows Operating
 TW> system is a "Rip Off" or Corporate greed. MS provides and endless stream
 TW> of FREE upgrades to keep up with the misdeeds of others.
 TW> THERE is no such a thing as a FREE LUNCH". Soem one has to pay
 TW> somewhere. Adn the easiest was it to tack on a Statistical extimate of
 TW> the "Maintenance" cost ot the Origional Purchase.
 TW> FAR better then PAYING per incident for those patches IMHO.

There would be far less patches if the code was better written from the outset. 
 Microsoft didn't get that phrase "Did it run?  Ship it!" moniker for shipping 
good code in it's OS products.

It is their poor programming habits that made cracking such a fun and easy 
thing to do.

The only people that should be paying for those patches is Microsoft because it 
is their own design flaws in the first place.

Robert.
--- JamNNTPd/Linux v1.0 - w/Mods by Hub2000
 * Origin: Hub2000 FTN News Server (1:229/2000)

.