Subject: Re: Latest on CPRM at the Register
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 14:10:25 +0900

>>>>> "kms" == Karsten M Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> writes:

    kms>   - Followup conversation with Hal Varian, UC Berkeley, who
    kms> opined that it wasn't completely out in left field (actually,
    kms> I think the phrase was "looks about right to me"). 
[...]
    kms> Well, I'm interested in feedback on the arguments as well.
    kms> Hey, Stephen, care to bash my head against *another* wall
    kms> this week?

No, you're an Emacs user, you're in enough pain.

Besides, I wouldn't want to argue against Hal.

One thing that hasn't been said explicitly that's probably worth
saying is that while Microsoft surely considers the pirates a good use
of marketing dollars (free distribution of freebies), they do want the
option to shut off the mass producers _at a time of their choosing_.

On the general argument, I tend to think that anything that makes
admin more difficult and expensive would scare Microsoft a lot.  That
expense comes right out of their pockets, especially after that
expensive "TCO" advertising campaign.  The whole point of Microsoft is
that unskilled labor can operate computers, and that you don't need an
expensive centralized IT department---or worse, to go through
purchasing to get a whole new computer or peripheral---to support
routine OA tasks.

-- 
University of Tsukuba                Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences       Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
_________________  _________________  _________________  _________________
What are those straight lines for?  "XEmacs rules."