Quote:
|
Originally Posted by greffov
Usually it doesn't, since you can get those for free.
|
But you can still charge for the labor of putting it on there, you'd just charge less because there's NO license cost. The arguement still does apply. Microsoft is saying that if you sell it with an operating system, you can sell software and labor... with a "naked" PC, you can't do that...
Keep in mind that I like building my own PC, so this is all academic for me anyway, but I can definately see the business point of what Microsoft is saying...
Quote:
|
Simple fact is that people don't want to buy something they can also get for free. (Even when that's not legal.)
|
Funny, I see that exact same argument in reverse when defending P2P...
Still, Microsoft's point is valid: As a business, why intentionally make a choice to not sell something? Even if that something is pure labor in installing a free OS? Or if you're strictly a Microsoft shop, why make the choice to not use your volume liscense agreement?
__________________
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GB/G/H/J/MC/S d-(--)@ s+:+ a-- C !U--- P--- L--(-) E- W N-(--) !o K--- w++ O--- M--(--) V-- PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP- t-- 5-- X- R(+) tv (++) b-- DI+ D---- G- e+++ h-- r* y++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Yeah, my computer sucks. You try and do better.