Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday May 22 2015, @11:09PM   Printer-friendly
from the threatened-or-lobbying? dept.

When the UK government announced plans to shift to the .odf Open Document Format, and away from Microsoft's proprietary .doc and .docx formats, Microsoft threatened to move its research facilities out of the UK.

The prime minister's director of strategy at the time, Steve Hilton, said that "Microsoft phoned Conservative MPs with Microsoft R&D facilities in their constituencies and said we will close them down in your constituencies if this goes through" "We just resisted. You have to be brave," Hilton said.


Although I am not a great lover of Microsoft, I'm not sure that this is any different than many other companies who will try to protect their profits - and, arguably, the jobs of their employees - when they can see the potential for the loss of business. But perhaps other companies are a little more subtle - especially when it is obvious that official papers will one day become public knowledge.

[Editor's Comment: This submission has been significantly edited - comment is not attributable to sigma]

[Editor's Comment: Please see public apology regarding this story.]

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by sigma on Saturday May 23 2015, @01:53PM

    by sigma (1225) on Saturday May 23 2015, @01:53PM (#186859)

    I think soylent editors should adhere to a policy of not putting words in the submitter's mouth

    Agreed, absolutely.

    "if they want to add their own two cents (a practice whose merits are also open to debate, but setting that aside)" "A simple horizontal rule beneath the submission, with the editors addition below that, would probably suffice."

    I'm going to respectfully disagree with you here. If the editors want to add their own two cents, they can respond inline like the rest of us. Their role here is to be responsible, not privileged.

    The stories we submit are a reflection of our enthusiasms and beliefs, the tone and character of those posts is as much part of the submitter's story as the actual content. I've been fighting for open file, data, and protocol standards since the '80s. The value to the world of fully interoperable cross-platforms is both obvious and immense, but at every stage where it became likely or possible, one company - Microsoft - stepped up to sabotage the effort. For thirty years they've done that in order to maintain their profit and control over the computing world, but they've cost the world's businesses and individuals far more than even the monopoly rents they've they've raked in as a result.

    Their business model is the equivalent of a street thief wrecking a $500 dollar car dashboard to steal a $50 radio. So yes, I'm passionate about it, and when I see my submission being edited to appease those thugs. like you, I'm annoyed.

    The community is what makes sites like SN and Slashdot before it, an eclectic community with a wide range of opinions, styles and passions will always be more active and interesting than a bland monoculture. SN's editors should embrace and encourage that diversity, not sabotage it to appease some corporate arseholes.

    If any of my postings are edited again, I'm gone. I'm sure there'll be plenty who'll say "good riddance", but if you read my submitting and posting history, you'll see I've been a solid contributor here.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2