On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Michel Vuijlsteke wikipedia@zog.org wrote:

I didn't really mind it -- a fun reminder some people still live in the Micro$haft Winbl0ws 1990s. :)

The fact is that Microsoft still effectively levies a tax on most computers sold, with no way for the consumer to know exactly how much of the cost of their system is a payment to Redmond, and no way to recover this cost.

It's long past the '90s, but Microsoft still tries to divide and conquer by attempting to convince users that they can get sued for using Linux unless they use a paid-for flavour of SUSE.

Microsoft tries to subvert and avoid any open standards (see ODF [they implemented it in a way that is incompatible with other implementations] and OOXML [they built in patent protection to their format to lock out free implementations, but try to avoid criticism with vague "promises" not to sue]) Embrace, Extend, Extinguish still seems to be their strategy.

They work with free projects when it suits them (and I'm actually quite grateful for their aerial photography in OpenStreetMap) but we have to be very very careful whenever we work with them that we don't get suckered into anything.

Wikimedia stands for freedom, and Microsoft has repeatedly shown itself to be an enemy of freedom. They are not to be trusted.

On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 02:21:46PM +1000, K. Peachey wrote:

And this has what to do with the Wikimedia-l List?

It's Yet Another data point on the list of reasons why net-nannying people is a bad idea, and might get you in NPOV&PR hot water (like poor old Microsoft here) Also, we're friends with the FSF. ;-)

sincerely, Kim Bruning