On Mon, 2012-06-25 at 22:29 -0400, Manolo Martínez wrote: > On 06/26/12 at 12:55am, Karol Babioch wrote: > > I have only the following criticism: Given the relatively low cost of > > getting a signed certificate from Microsoft (to my knowledge it will > > cost about 100 USD), it might fail to achieve what it is proposed to. > > Obviously Microsoft will try to prevent any sort of abuse, but even if > > Microsoft only hands out signed certificates after some extensive checks > > to trustworthy companies/organisations, it can't control it from there > > on any more. > > Just for clarification: you seem to be endorsing a model in which > organizations (linux distros?) pay Microsoft for the right to install > non-Microsoft software in PCs. Is that correct? First of all: Apologize for my OT noise. Second: Yes, FLOSS users are willing to pay 99 USD to an organization to use free as in beer software. I can't resist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IXmHqPWxUw ;D
