Re: I didn't bother to read the EULA

[Nicholas]

Joe --

Windows XP requires a separate license (Product Key) for each
installation on a different computer. Otherwise, Product Activation
will fail on the second computer installation. So, you need to purchase
a new license (Product Key) for another installation.

Read your Windows XP End-User License Agreement:

Start > Run and type: WINVER , and hit enter.

It clearly states that you may only install one (1) copy
of Windows XP on just one (1) computer. You will
need a new license (Product Key) for each new
installation on a different computer.

Also, open XP's "Help and Support" and type: EULA
and click on "Questions and Answers about the
End User License Agreement".

To purchase an additional Windows XP license, visit:
=20
Additional Licenses for Windows XP Home Edition
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/howtobuy/addlic.asp

Additional licenses for Windows XP Professional
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/howtobuy/addlic.asp

--=20
Nicholas

-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---------------------

"Joe" > wrote in message:
...

| I spent $200 on this Windows XP and I cant use it on both=20
| of my PCs at home is pure bull****. I will never buy or=20
| use a Microsoft product ever again! I can understand=20
| software piracy, but god this is gone too far.=20
|=20
| MR GATES MUST ASSUME WE HAVE ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD=20
| THAT WE CAN AFFORD $600 TO USE WINDOWS ON OUR SMALL 3 PC=20
| HOME NETWORK.=20
|=20
| BULL****!!!!!!!!!!!

[Donald McDaniel]

In article >,
says...
> Joe --
>
> Windows XP requires a separate license (Product Key) for each
> installation on a different computer. Otherwise, Product Activation
> will fail on the second computer installation. So, you need to purchase
> a new license (Product Key) for another installation.
>
> Read your Windows XP End-User License Agreement:
>
> Start > Run and type: WINVER , and hit enter.
>
> It clearly states that you may only install one (1) copy
> of Windows XP on just one (1) computer. You will
> need a new license (Product Key) for each new
> installation on a different computer.
>
> Also, open XP's "Help and Support" and type: EULA
> and click on "Questions and Answers about the
> End User License Agreement".
>
> To purchase an additional Windows XP license, visit:
>
> Additional Licenses for Windows XP Home Edition
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/howtobuy/addlic.asp
>
> Additional licenses for Windows XP Professional
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/howtobuy/addlic.asp
>
>
The Standard Microsoft License was reasonable when it was reasonably priced
at $89 or less. At the current $299 (or even $199) for a License, it now
seems more like the sky-high rents we are paying to slum lords. Microsoft
should immediately lower the price of a license for XP Home to $49, so the
average/low income person can afford it. Let's face it, not all of us make
$60,000/yr, or even $20,000/yr, or even $10,000/yr. Many of us are still
being paid minimum wage, while the slum lords are stealing our hard-earned
dollars for rat-infested warrens.

I can only assume that Microsoft must be trying to "socially engineer" low-
income people to stop using computers. Just another one of the tactics of
the elitists to keep the unwashed slaves "in their places". We can't have
any uppity plebes gaining knowledge of computers, now, can we?. It might help
to set them free.

No wonder so many of our people are escaping their misery through illegal
drugs, alcohol, and sex.

--
Donald L McDaniel
Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
================================================== ==========

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Donald;
No one has to buy Windows XP at all.
There is no compelling reason to upgrade a previous OS unless there
are features in the new OS that are needed.

At least from Windows 95 on the price for home users of Windows has
stayed the same.
About $200 for a full version, about $100 for upgrade.
That actually comes out to a price drop when you take into account
inflation, so you are getting it for less.

We have no right to say "Microsoft should immediately lower the price
of a license for XP Home to $49, so the average/low income person can
afford it"
What do you base that statement on?
Where is your marketing research to support that statement.

Where do you work?
Can I come in to your place of business and expect to get your
services at 25% what your business wants? Why or why not?

This is capitalism in progress.
If you do not like the price, buy something else, and there is
something else.
Why does anybody NEED to buy the latest OS?
Where is the OS that came with their computer?
You make is seem like someone is forcing people to upgrade, they
choose to upgrade.
No one forces anyone.
People can choose for themselves.
Most people upgrade to a new OS simply when it is time to buy a new
computer...another choice they make.

Your assumption "I can only assume that Microsoft must be trying to
"socially engineer" low-income people to stop using computers" is also
false.
Explain how a business can make money by encouraging people not to use
their service.

Your suggestion "No wonder so many of our people are escaping their
misery through illegal drugs, alcohol, and sex" is a cheap excuse at
best.
If those are your problems, do not blame them on anyone other than
yourself.
Those problems are also a choice an individual makes and is personally
responsible for.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
An easier way to read newsgroup messages:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/using/newsgroups/setup.asp
http://dts-l.org/index.html


"Donald McDaniel" > wrote in message
m...
> The Standard Microsoft License was reasonable when it was reasonably
priced
> at $89 or less. At the current $299 (or even $199) for a License,
it now
> seems more like the sky-high rents we are paying to slum lords.
Microsoft
> should immediately lower the price of a license for XP Home to $49,
so the
> average/low income person can afford it. Let's face it, not all of
us make
> $60,000/yr, or even $20,000/yr, or even $10,000/yr. Many of us are
still
> being paid minimum wage, while the slum lords are stealing our
hard-earned
> dollars for rat-infested warrens.
>
> I can only assume that Microsoft must be trying to "socially
engineer" low-
> income people to stop using computers. Just another one of the
tactics of
> the elitists to keep the unwashed slaves "in their places". We
can't have
> any uppity plebes gaining knowledge of computers, now, can we?. It
might help
> to set them free.
>
> No wonder so many of our people are escaping their misery through
illegal
> drugs, alcohol, and sex.
>
> --
> Donald L McDaniel
> Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
> ================================================== ==========
>

[Donald McDaniel]

In article >,
says...
> Donald;
> No one has to buy Windows XP at all.
> There is no compelling reason to upgrade a previous OS unless there
> are features in the new OS that are needed.
>
> At least from Windows 95 on the price for home users of Windows has
> stayed the same.
> About $200 for a full version, about $100 for upgrade.
> That actually comes out to a price drop when you take into account
> inflation, so you are getting it for less.
>
> We have no right to say "Microsoft should immediately lower the price
> of a license for XP Home to $49, so the average/low income person can
> afford it"
> What do you base that statement on?
> Where is your marketing research to support that statement.
>
> Where do you work?
> Can I come in to your place of business and expect to get your
> services at 25% what your business wants? Why or why not?
>
> This is capitalism in progress.
> If you do not like the price, buy something else, and there is
> something else.
> Why does anybody NEED to buy the latest OS?
> Where is the OS that came with their computer?
> You make is seem like someone is forcing people to upgrade, they
> choose to upgrade.
> No one forces anyone.
> People can choose for themselves.
> Most people upgrade to a new OS simply when it is time to buy a new
> computer...another choice they make.
>
> Your assumption "I can only assume that Microsoft must be trying to
> "socially engineer" low-income people to stop using computers" is also
> false.
> Explain how a business can make money by encouraging people not to use
> their service.
>
> Your suggestion "No wonder so many of our people are escaping their
> misery through illegal drugs, alcohol, and sex" is a cheap excuse at
> best.
> If those are your problems, do not blame them on anyone other than
> yourself.
> Those problems are also a choice an individual makes and is personally
> responsible for.
>
>
And WHY do I have no right to exercise my First Amendment rights of Free
Speech? Just like all the elitists, you want to shut us up..

But the fact remains, I have EVERY right to suggest that Microsoft should
immeiately lower the price on XP Home to $49. That is my opinion. I have
every right to my opinion.

Explain how a business can make money by gouging the public.

--
Donald L McDaniel
Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
================================================== ==========

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

"Donald McDaniel" > wrote in message
<snip>
> But the fact remains, I have EVERY right to suggest that Microsoft should
> immeiately lower the price on XP Home to $49. That is my opinion. I have
> every right to my opinion.
>
> Explain how a business can make money by gouging the public.
>
> --
> Donald L McDaniel
> Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed


Explain how a business can make money if it sells it's products for less
then it costs to develop them and the new versions.

--
Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"Donald McDaniel" > wrote in message
m...
> In article >,
> says...
> > Donald;
> > No one has to buy Windows XP at all.
> > There is no compelling reason to upgrade a previous OS unless there
> > are features in the new OS that are needed.
> >
> > At least from Windows 95 on the price for home users of Windows has
> > stayed the same.
> > About $200 for a full version, about $100 for upgrade.
> > That actually comes out to a price drop when you take into account
> > inflation, so you are getting it for less.
> >
> > We have no right to say "Microsoft should immediately lower the price
> > of a license for XP Home to $49, so the average/low income person can
> > afford it"
> > What do you base that statement on?
> > Where is your marketing research to support that statement.
> >
> > Where do you work?
> > Can I come in to your place of business and expect to get your
> > services at 25% what your business wants? Why or why not?
> >
> > This is capitalism in progress.
> > If you do not like the price, buy something else, and there is
> > something else.
> > Why does anybody NEED to buy the latest OS?
> > Where is the OS that came with their computer?
> > You make is seem like someone is forcing people to upgrade, they
> > choose to upgrade.
> > No one forces anyone.
> > People can choose for themselves.
> > Most people upgrade to a new OS simply when it is time to buy a new
> > computer...another choice they make.
> >
> > Your assumption "I can only assume that Microsoft must be trying to
> > "socially engineer" low-income people to stop using computers" is also
> > false.
> > Explain how a business can make money by encouraging people not to use
> > their service.
> >
> > Your suggestion "No wonder so many of our people are escaping their
> > misery through illegal drugs, alcohol, and sex" is a cheap excuse at
> > best.
> > If those are your problems, do not blame them on anyone other than
> > yourself.
> > Those problems are also a choice an individual makes and is personally
> > responsible for.
> >
> >
> And WHY do I have no right to exercise my First Amendment rights of Free
> Speech? Just like all the elitists, you want to shut us up..
>
> But the fact remains, I have EVERY right to suggest that Microsoft should
> immeiately lower the price on XP Home to $49. That is my opinion. I have
> every right to my opinion.
>
> Explain how a business can make money by gouging the public.
>
> --
> Donald L McDaniel
> Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
> ================================================== ==========
>

[Donald McDaniel]

In article >,
says...
> "Donald McDaniel" > wrote in message
> <snip>
> > But the fact remains, I have EVERY right to suggest that Microsoft should
> > immeiately lower the price on XP Home to $49. That is my opinion. I have
> > every right to my opinion.
> >
> > Explain how a business can make money by gouging the public.
> >
> > --
> > Donald L McDaniel
> > Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
>
>
> Explain how a business can make money if it sells it's products for less
> then it costs to develop them and the new versions.
>
>
Maybe Microsoft needs to unload some of its cash. What better way to do it
than help provide advanced technology to the poor and marginal.

--
Donald L McDaniel
Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
================================================== ==========

[Lorne Smith]

"Donald McDaniel" > wrote in message
m...
> In article >,
> says...
> > "Donald McDaniel" > wrote in message
> > <snip>
> > > But the fact remains, I have EVERY right to suggest that Microsoft
should
> > > immeiately lower the price on XP Home to $49. That is my opinion. I
have
> > > every right to my opinion.
> > >
> > > Explain how a business can make money by gouging the public.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Donald L McDaniel
> > > Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
> >
> >
> > Explain how a business can make money if it sells it's products for less
> > then it costs to develop them and the new versions.
> >
> >
> Maybe Microsoft needs to unload some of its cash. What better way to do
it
> than help provide advanced technology to the poor and marginal.
>
> --
> Donald L McDaniel
> Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
> ================================================== ==========
>

Why should they want to unload some of it's profits? They have 1000's of
employees to pay, utility bills to pay, taxes to pay, lawyers to pay, and
shareholders to pay. Most of what's left over gets plied back into new R&D,
so if they reduced the selling price, they reduce their profits... Employees
still need to be paid and they WON'T be happy with a pay cut (would you?),
their bills still need to be paid and they don't go down... their
shareholders still need to be paid and THEY won't be happy to take such a
cut, the lawyers MUST be paid or MS start losing in various suits, so we're
left with R&D which WILL get cut and therefore new software takes longer to
come out and isn't as feature rich...

So the end run it, MS reduce their prices, and new software suffers...
Besides... why should they anyway? The whole point of a business is to make
money so calling they greedy is pointless.. They are merely performing their
function...

Lorne

[Testy]

Actually Bill Gates philanthropic donations are quite extensive.

Testy

"Donald McDaniel" > wrote in message
m...
> In article >,
> says...
> > "Donald McDaniel" > wrote in message
> > <snip>
> > > But the fact remains, I have EVERY right to suggest that Microsoft
should
> > > immeiately lower the price on XP Home to $49. That is my opinion. I
have
> > > every right to my opinion.
> > >
> > > Explain how a business can make money by gouging the public.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Donald L McDaniel
> > > Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
> >
> >
> > Explain how a business can make money if it sells it's products for less
> > then it costs to develop them and the new versions.
> >
> >
> Maybe Microsoft needs to unload some of its cash. What better way to do
it
> than help provide advanced technology to the poor and marginal.
>
> --
> Donald L McDaniel
> Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
> ================================================== ==========
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003

[John E. Carty]

"Donald McDaniel" > wrote in message
m...
> In article >,
> says...
> > Donald;
> > No one has to buy Windows XP at all.
> > There is no compelling reason to upgrade a previous OS unless there
> > are features in the new OS that are needed.
> >
> > At least from Windows 95 on the price for home users of Windows has
> > stayed the same.
> > About $200 for a full version, about $100 for upgrade.
> > That actually comes out to a price drop when you take into account
> > inflation, so you are getting it for less.
> >
> > We have no right to say "Microsoft should immediately lower the price
> > of a license for XP Home to $49, so the average/low income person can
> > afford it"
> > What do you base that statement on?
> > Where is your marketing research to support that statement.
> >
> > Where do you work?
> > Can I come in to your place of business and expect to get your
> > services at 25% what your business wants? Why or why not?
> >
> > This is capitalism in progress.
> > If you do not like the price, buy something else, and there is
> > something else.
> > Why does anybody NEED to buy the latest OS?
> > Where is the OS that came with their computer?
> > You make is seem like someone is forcing people to upgrade, they
> > choose to upgrade.
> > No one forces anyone.
> > People can choose for themselves.
> > Most people upgrade to a new OS simply when it is time to buy a new
> > computer...another choice they make.
> >
> > Your assumption "I can only assume that Microsoft must be trying to
> > "socially engineer" low-income people to stop using computers" is also
> > false.
> > Explain how a business can make money by encouraging people not to use
> > their service.
> >
> > Your suggestion "No wonder so many of our people are escaping their
> > misery through illegal drugs, alcohol, and sex" is a cheap excuse at
> > best.
> > If those are your problems, do not blame them on anyone other than
> > yourself.
> > Those problems are also a choice an individual makes and is personally
> > responsible for.
> >
> >
> And WHY do I have no right to exercise my First Amendment rights of Free
> Speech? Just like all the elitists, you want to shut us up..
>
> But the fact remains, I have EVERY right to suggest that Microsoft should
> immeiately lower the price on XP Home to $49. That is my opinion. I have
> every right to my opinion.

I guess that means BMW should lower their cost to $16,000 on all models.
After all, not everyone can afford a BMW :-)


>
> Explain how a business can make money by gouging the public.
>
> --
> Donald L McDaniel
> Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
> ================================================== ==========
>

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Donald;
You are correct.
I mis-worded my statement.
But if you read it closer I never directed it specifically at you,
that is your own little twist of my words.
Instead of "We have no right to say "Microsoft should immediately
lower the price of a license for XP Home to $49, so the average/low
income person can
afford it""
I should have said "Microsoft and any other business for that matter
has NO obligation to take our price suggestions"

Whether Microsoft "Gouges" or not may be a matter of opinion.
The fact is that Microsoft does make money.

I am glad that we agree on the other points since you did not contest
them.
However I would like an answer to my questions re-posted below for you
to answer:
"Where do you work?
Can I come in to your place of business and expect to get your
services at 25% what your business wants? Why or why not?"

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
An easier way to read newsgroup messages:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/using/newsgroups/setup.asp
http://dts-l.org/index.html


"Donald McDaniel" > wrote in message
m...
> And WHY do I have no right to exercise my First Amendment rights of
Free
> Speech? Just like all the elitists, you want to shut us up..
>
> But the fact remains, I have EVERY right to suggest that Microsoft
should
> immeiately lower the price on XP Home to $49. That is my opinion.
I have
> every right to my opinion.
>
> Explain how a business can make money by gouging the public.
>
> --
> Donald L McDaniel
> Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
> ================================================== ==========
>

[TEW]

Hey, come on Dud, how about $29, sounds better to me. Wait, how about $19,
yea even better!
:-P

"Donald McDaniel" > wrote in message
m...
> >
<snip>
> But the fact remains, I have EVERY right to suggest that Microsoft should
> immeiately lower the price on XP Home to $49. That is my opinion. I have
> every right to my opinion.
>
> Explain how a business can make money by gouging the public.
>
> --
> Donald L McDaniel
> Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
> ================================================== ==========
>

[Brian Tillman]

>Maybe Microsoft needs to unload some of its cash. What better way to do it
>than help provide advanced technology to the poor and marginal.

The poor and marginal have bigger problems than trying to run the latest and
greatest PC operating system.
--
Brian Tillman Internet: Brian.Tillman at smiths-aerospace dot com
Smiths Aerospace Addresses modified to prevent SPAM.
3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS 1B3 Replace "at" with "@", "dot" with "."
Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991
This opinion doesn't represent that of my company

[Donald McDaniel]

In article >,
says...
> >Maybe Microsoft needs to unload some of its cash. What better way to do it
> >than help provide advanced technology to the poor and marginal.
>
> The poor and marginal have bigger problems than trying to run the latest and
> greatest PC operating system.
>

That really is an elitist attitude you have there, bud. You need to work on
it.
--
Donald L McDaniel
Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
================================================== ==========

[Donald McDaniel]

In article >,
says...
> Donald;
> You are correct.
> I mis-worded my statement.
You not only "mis-worded" your statement, you showed what is REALLY in your
heart: You, and others like you, really think you have the right to tell us
what our rights are or are not. Well, bud, be put on notice that the U.S.
Constitution tells us what our rights are.

> But if you read it closer I never directed it specifically at you,
> that is your own little twist of my words.
But you MEANT it to be directed to me, else you never would have said it.
Don't be a hypocrit on top of being an elitist.

> Instead of "We have no right to say "Microsoft should immediately
> lower the price of a license for XP Home to $49, so the average/low
> income person can
> afford it""

> I should have said "Microsoft and any other business for that matter
> has NO obligation to take our price suggestions"
Many in the world disagree with that attitude, my friend. It is however, the
attitude which seems to be taking over the minds and hearts of the people
here in the U.S. The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer. The divide
between the rich and the poor gets wider and wider each year. Many today who
were in the Middle Class 10 years ago find themselves on the street because
of that attitude.

By the way, many believe that businesses DO have the obligation to take our
price suggestions into consideration. Capitalism without a heart is just as
evil as socialism without a heart.
>
> Whether Microsoft "Gouges" or not may be a matter of opinion.
> The fact is that Microsoft does make money.
Microsoft doesnt just "make money". Microsoft makes LOADS AND LOADS of
money. So much money it is almost obscene in the face of the poverty in the
United States and the Third World.
>
> I am glad that we agree on the other points since you did not contest
> them.
Lack of contest does not imply agreement.

> However I would like an answer to my questions re-posted below for you
> to answer:
If you are asking me, I will be glad to answer your questions.
> "Where do you work?
I work for a non-profit Non-Governmental Agency.

> Can I come in to your place of business and expect to get your
> services at 25% what your business wants?
All you have to do is meet the criteria for our services, the fee for which
would not be charged to you.

I don't own a business(and the poor and marginal do not own businesses.
Perhaps they could get a start on the road to prosperity if they had advanced
computer skills using the latest OS).

I am paid barely above the Minimum Wage. 25% less would make me eligible for
Food Stamps. Big deal: I would get $60/month(or less, depending on my income)
to buy groceries with(and wouldn't be able to use them to purchase "TP" or
Laundry detergent). The normal Microsoftie probably spends that much money
every week buying Mochas for his friends.

Even 50% less for Microsoft employees would make them have to buy a Chevy
instead of a BMW or Infiniti, all of which are out of the question for the
poor and marginal in the U.S. Instead of having $40Billions in the bank,
Microsoft would only have $20billions. There aren't many, if any, businesses
in the entire world with either of those cash positions.


--
Donald L McDaniel
Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
================================================== ==========

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Donald;
Your first comment shows you for who you really are.
You have an agenda and you need to twist the meaning to suit your
desires.
I mis-stated and you refuse to accept the correction.
If your world is so perfect that no corrections can ever be made, it
makes for better understanding of your current attitude.

I said "...to take our price suggestions.." NOT "...to take your price
suggestions..." you should learn to read! That statement applies to
others as well.
You even twist what I correctly state, no wonder you have this
attitude.

Your name calling "hypocrit on top of being an elitist" is really the
final straw.
Name calling is the resort of those with positions they are otherwise
incapable of supporting.
Whether the position is supportable is not the issue, you have clearly
shown with your name calling that you are incapable.
When name calling is your strong point, there is nothing else left.

Good bye, respond only if you enjoy reading what you say.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
An easier way to read newsgroup messages:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/using/newsgroups/setup.asp
http://dts-l.org/index.html


"Donald McDaniel" > wrote in message
m...
> In article >,
> says...
> > Donald;
> > You are correct.
> > I mis-worded my statement.
> You not only "mis-worded" your statement, you showed what is REALLY
in your
> heart: You, and others like you, really think you have the right to
tell us
> what our rights are or are not. Well, bud, be put on notice that
the U.S.
> Constitution tells us what our rights are.
>
> > But if you read it closer I never directed it specifically at you,
> > that is your own little twist of my words.
> But you MEANT it to be directed to me, else you never would have
said it.
> Don't be a hypocrit on top of being an elitist.

Snipped my statements and your garbage what ever it was!

[Alex Nichol]

Mike Brannigan [MSFT] wrote:

>
>Explain how a business can make money if it sells it's products for less
>then it costs to develop them and the new versions.


Henry Ford made a lot by selling Model Ts for $100 - try selling any car
at a similar price now, even allowing for inflation


It is legitimate to assert that Microsoft's pricing policy is not in all
respects the best for the company - but not that they have to bend it to
provide cheaper systems to customers at a lower final bottom line


--=20
Alex Nichol MS MVP (Windows Technologies)
Bournemouth, U.K.

[Richter]

>
> I don't own a business(and the poor and marginal do not own businesses.


Maybe you should start one...

>
> I am paid barely above the Minimum Wage. 25% less would make me eligible
for
> Food Stamps. Big deal: I would get $60/month(or less, depending on my
income)
> to buy groceries with(and wouldn't be able to use them to purchase "TP" or
> Laundry detergent). The normal Microsoftie probably spends that much
money
> every week buying Mochas for his friends.

Soo..Get a job with Microsoft

>
> Even 50% less for Microsoft employees would make them have to buy a Chevy
> instead of a BMW or Infiniti, all of which are out of the question for the
> poor and marginal in the U.S. Instead of having $40Billions in the bank,
> Microsoft would only have $20billions. There aren't many, if any,
businesses
> in the entire world with either of those cash positions.

Maybe you could get a job as a financial consultant...

>
>
> --
> Donald L McDaniel
> Post All replies to the Newsgroup, so that all may be informed
> ================================================== ==========
>