Hey JEAN!

Dec 12 08:56 05, JEAN PARROT wrote to MAURICE KINAL:

 JP>         Hard as it is, in this case it would be a no. It has to be an
 JP>   expense to benefit your operation.

Which it happens to be in this case.  Not only that but the work I do with
it also takes into account other OS's weaknesses, and thus more universal
accessability speaking.

 JP>   In your exemple, you would
 JP>   benefit Linux.

Right.  I'd be reallocating what normally would go to MS and put it
directly into the developer's pockets instead.  Also that has greater
potential for further development since it would help increase their
budget.

 JP>   Now if you bought Linux, you could defray its cost
 JP>   against your operating income.

I do buy it.  It costs me more then following the pack who actually do zero
in the development end of things.  However for me personally this isn't an
issue since I prefer running my system(s) then the other way around. 
Having said that the cost is still greater in both time and actual dollars
but the end result is worth more to me then what I put into it whereas MS
products are worthless to me personally, even if 100% of the cost could be
written off on income tax.

 JP>   This sloop that I had on charter
 JP>   was a "business" venture and I could defray the cost of
insurance,
 JP>   mooring, new sail and winter storage from its incoming revenues.
 JP>   Whatever was left, was added to my own revenue and taxed.

Understood.  I was just speculating on the definition of 'commercial'. 
Personally I don't view the operation here as an actual commercial
enterprise but it easily could be.  The potential is definetly here.

Life is good,
Maurice

--- Msged/LNX 6.1.2