[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 09:01 +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 06:30 +0100, Adam Latham wrote: > > > The response I got from the school to my polite request to possibly > > 'sponsoring' the cost of some OpenCD's to give out, or advertising the SFD > > was: > > > > 'We are committed to becoming a business and enterprise Microsoft user. > > We see no reason to promote the use of untested software that comes with > > no warranty as to its suitability for use.' > > Obviously never read a Microsoft EULA then have they! I think you need > to reply with some examples of schools using free software, facts about > software warranties that only warrant that the software is not under > warranty and not guaranteed to be suitable for any purpose. > > "Limited warranty for software acquired in the US or Canada" > http://dailycupoftech.com/2008/05/21/ms-eula-in-plain-english/ > > Even that is limited to 90 days, only applies to the unpatched OS and is > invalid in some US states anyway. > > In precisely the same manner as Microsoft, the FSF, Debian and anyone > else will gladly refund the purchase price of your free software should > problems occur. In precisely the same manner as Microsoft, no-one is > entitled to damages including but not limited to consequential > damages ... even if any remedy fails of its essential purpose. In > precisely the same manner as Microsoft, the entire liability from all > circumstances (whether known or unknown) will never exceed the purchase > price of the software. (So the cheaper you get it, the less the > liability; clever that one - those with the biggest discounts get the > least cover.) > > Microsofts entire liability for the warranty is a refund - we offer that > too. > > "Microsoft and its suppliers provide the Software and support services > (if any) AS IS AND WITH ALL FAULTS, and hereby disclaim all other > warranties and conditions, whether express, implied or statutory. ... > TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL > MICROSOFT OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, > PUNITIVE, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHATSOEVER." > > That looks remarkably similar to the GPL warranty statement. > > # This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, > # but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of > # MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the > # GNU General Public License for more details. > > > Whilst I personally consider the statement just a tad on the comical side > > (e.g. the world renowned lack of fitness for purpose of a lot of > > commercial products!) I fear that this is the brainless approach that we > > will be up against. > > It is something that FSF have seen before and beaten before. Assemble > the facts, present your case and clear up the misconceptions. > > > Schools get massively reduced rates on M$ products, and then spend masses > > of cash on making them work on the rather tired hardware we use. Case in > > point.. a network M$ Office 2007 installation on a Celeron 1.8Ghz 512Mb > > Ram desktop took nearly 2 1/2 hours!. > > I can offer anyone a global 100000000000000000000000000000000000% > reduction on the purchase price of Debian, right here and now. This > offer is valid in perpetuity to all users from all countries without > discrimination, prejudice or merit. Furthermore, this discount is > available to all resellers of Debian in perpetuity and without limit. > This offer is valid in all countries, states and communities, even to > the ISS. If you can obtain Debian, you are entitled to this offer, even > if you are not actually on this planet. If anything goes wrong or if you > are at all dissatisfied in even the most trivial way, you are entitled > to an immediate and full refund of the original purchase price, before > the discount was applied. > > Beat that, Microsoft. > lol! I did point out that a warranty on software is more than a little dubious. However, I got the impression that having very cheap toys from M$ with or without the warranty issue was more important than a little common sense! (Just consider the current web-standards discussion going on here, for a clearer view of how it all works!) My school uses M$Office '07, with its' fantastically useless xml type .docx extensions. Naturally, being based in one of the poorest areas of the country, almost none of the parents of the pupils attending local schools will have the spare £100 or so to buy Office 2007 (pupils don't get discounts 'cus they don't buy enterprise products!(allegedly!)). So, kids can work on office 2007 at school (albeit painfully slowly) but not at home. They can work on M$ Works at home but not at school. There has been no rational explanation as to how this helps students maintain grades or complete homework. By encouraging them to use Open Source products such as OpenOffice or KOffice (Abiword etc. the list is almost endless!) they can still save this work in the M$ .doc format (or a compatible one) and use the same document at school under office 2007 in 'compatibility mode'. They also don't need to spend a penny to do this (unless they want to!) If Torbay council and the government are serious about 'raising attainment' then the cultural imperialism that is currently abundant (i.e. if you can't afford M$/proprietary products then you lose) needs to be addressed. Promoting Free Software is at least a start! The usual 'irrational' explanation is 'Viruses and Security/Integrity'. I think we all know that this means 'I have no idea how to do anything unless M$ tells me.' Rant over! Taking a double dose of 'chill-pills' and going to lie-down now! lol! Adam -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html