From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 23 06:51:44 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95B4D16A41F for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 06:51:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.web-strider.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1112D43D46 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2005 06:51:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedwin2k (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id j8N6s4b09821 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2005 23:54:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 23:51:43 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 In-Reply-To: <20050921133920.3413.GERARD@seibercom.net> Importance: Normal Subject: RE: Re[2]: IE in FreeBSD? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 06:51:44 -0000 >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Gerard Seibert >Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 10:46 AM >To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >Subject: Re[2]: IE in FreeBSD? > > Lets be fair here. A multitude of companies are out sourceing. IBM, = Dell, > etc. are all out sourceing. I have spend days tying to get a > tech-support individual that can speak fluent English. > If the criteria for using a product is whether its producer is = entirely > based in and uses only American products and labor, then the pool of > available products is going to be extremely small. You missed the point. American recruiting firms get money for finding = people to fill positions in America. They do not (with rare exceptions) get = money for finding people to fill positions in India or China. Microsoft (according to the article) is actively outsourcing to those = locations. Thus their new positions they want people for are not going to be filled = by American search firms (with rare exceptions) They are going to be = filled by Chinese and Indian search firms. It is illogical for an American search firm to be sending money to a = company that is actively working to NOT have to ever need their services. Every = dollar that an American search firm spends on a Microsoft product simply helps=20 Microsoft to dry up the pool of positions and send them overseas that = much faster. In short, the search firms are helping to fund their own = demise. The situation is analogous to General Motors buying a bunch of Ford cars for their fleet sales reps. to use to drive around to their accounts, = because the person at GM doing the purchase finds that the Ford cars are easier to drive. Do you get it now? Ted