Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 24th Nov 2006 23:05 UTC, submitted by SEJeff
Thread beginning with comment 185339
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Canonical is a private company
by NotParker on Sat 25th Nov 2006 17:24
in reply to "RE[3]: Canonical is a private company"
So the way you see it, contributing programs for the benefit of a private company like Canonical is more "pure" than programmers writing programs for a publicly traded company like Microsoft or Novell or IBM?
Oh wait ... open source programmers regularly write programs for the benefit of companies like IBM or Novell.
Its Microsoft thats EVIL. And Novell is EVIL jr.
RE[5]: Canonical is a private company
by slight on Sat 25th Nov 2006 17:36
in reply to "RE[4]: Canonical is a private company"
RE[5]: Canonical is a private company
by NotParker on Sun 26th Nov 2006 06:16
in reply to "RE[4]: Canonical is a private company"
RE[5]: Canonical is a private company
by stestagg on Sun 26th Nov 2006 15:55
in reply to "RE[4]: Canonical is a private company"




Member since:
2006-04-21
Then maybe he should have said "standing up for what they think is right", "having moral standards".
For a lot of companies, Microsoft and Intel among them, it seems that "how much money can I get" is the only "moral standard" they understand, and the amount of people they screw over is either immaterial or a badge of honour.