|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 07 2013 @ 09:26 PM EST |
Agreed. The amount of the fine was nothing more than a SMALL
blip in their cost of doing business.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: tiger99 on Friday, March 08 2013 @ 08:19 AM EST |
| Sadly, I can account for two of the downloads. Well, downloading Firefox or
Chrome is not sad, what is sad is that I really had to buy a cheap laptop to be
able to update my (Linux-based) TomTom every 3 months, and it broke, so I had to
buy another in a hurry. The first must have been near the beginning of the 14
month period, and I am fairly certain that I grumbled about it here. I was
hospitalised just after buying the second, so likely did not mention it here,
but that must have been close to the end of the 14 month period. However, the
Corrupt Monopoly will not be gaining much from me, as I do not envisage ever
needing another Windoze based machine of any kind. If TomTom would be more
sensible, I could get rid of Windoze completely. As of now, I need to boot the
machine precisely 4 times a year (never more) for map updates. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 08 2013 @ 08:42 AM EST |
Going by the numbers provided:
561 Mil / 15.3 Mil = 36.67
For a
paltry 37 Euro per person, MS was allowed to ensure they stayed locked in to IE.
Or in the alternative, for those that got on the new Windows released, were
potentially re-locked in to IE.
That's easily small enough to be a "cost
of doing business".
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 09 2013 @ 09:51 PM EST |
This is pretty expensive for user acquisition....
I've heard (will not name source) that Google expects a user
acquisition cost of ~$3 for Chrome and a lifetime user revenue
of ~$20.
Spending $5+ or $35+ (depending on which of the above
calculations you use) is pretty expensive compared to what
Google pays.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
