>>>FWIW, I think the odds of me being right are better than a million to 1.
>>
>Based on what? You have no way to quantify this. (or was this just an expression?)
>>
>
>Sure I do. It's just basic probability. And given that I have provided ample basis for my opinion, the odds are probably more likely than not that I am right. FWIW, the windows subsididy is the basic argument that MS uses to justify its position...
>
>
>
>>
>So I guess you didn't understand. If you taking about if MS does or does not get $ - that implies finance (if you do or do not get money - that's finance), which in turn impies accounting...which of course bring us all the around the circle to the begining....YOU DO NOT HAVE knowlege of Microsoft's accounting do you?
>>
>
>I have a basic understanding of how the functional units roll up. I have a basic undrstanding of how revenues and costs get shared. Just an FYI, prior to being a software developer, I was an accountant. Look...people from MS are free to come up here and correct the record if I have materially misstated something.
>
>>
>Ok then you can not say that VFP is subsized by windows can you?
>>
>
>Simple...
>
>>
>No all you can do is make what is indeed a plausible conclusion, but still speculation on your part.
>>
>
>I suppose... as I said, folks from MS can correct the record here if I am materially wrong.


I doubt that will happen one way or another since it would probably cost the person their job.


>Riiiiiight - so its not significant anyway - correct? If all the developer tools MS puts how work the same way...what makes it so special to point out the VFP falls into this category as well?
>>
>
>Becuase MS has said that if somebody wanted to take the .NET runtimes - and deploy them to Linux - that too would be a license violation.
>
>Victor, the license clearly states the runtimes have to be deployed in conjunction with Windows.


I belive there are ways around that problem, that or this whole thing is illegal (something I doubt Novell would be willing to risk.)
www.go-mono.com


>It is a subsidy. Whether you agree or not, I don't care. But one thing is for sure, I know a hell of alot more about the issue than you do.


You mean you're willing to speculate and argue more than me. Since you don't work for MS, you know nothing for sure about the issue.

>Tell you what, pose a counter argument as to why Windows does not subisidize VFP and .NET for that matter. I bet you can't....


No I'm not going to allow myself to be drawn into a pointless hypothetical argument on something that neither one of us has a way to prove.