On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 15:47:52 +0100, "F. Bertolazzi" <TOGLIeset@MAIUSCOLEtdd.it> wrote:>krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz: > >> I don't know why anyone would do business in France (or most of Europe), given >> their work rules. > >If the State owns the bigger electronics & defence companies ad it is a >chauvinist (french world...) nation, the best way to sell them stuff is to >have a non purely commercial operation there.What is a "non purely commercial operation"? Does this pay for the costs they're going to incur when closing the operation down?
Xilinx news
Started by ●January 22, 2011
Reply by ●January 23, 20112011-01-23
Reply by ●January 23, 20112011-01-23
On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 23:50:48 +1100, "Phil Allison" <phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote:> ><krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> > > >** You are a total cunt and a massive liar.It's so nice of you to add what you can to the group, Phyllis. Now run along and play with Dimmie.
Reply by ●January 23, 20112011-01-23
On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 23:51:12 +1100, "Phil Allison" <phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote:> ><krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> > > >** You are a total cunt and a massive liar. > > > >.... Phil > >Now *that's* beginning to sound like proper misogyny. John
Reply by ●January 23, 20112011-01-23
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz:> What is a "non purely commercial operation"?A factory or an R&D center.> Does this pay for the costs they're going to incur when closing the > operation down?Well, given that Europe accounts for 20% of their revenues and North America for 32%, probably wthey could have laid off somebody in the US.
Reply by ●January 23, 20112011-01-23
On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 09:15:55 -0800, John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:>On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 23:51:12 +1100, "Phil Allison" <phil_a@tpg.com.au> >wrote: > >> >><krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> >> >> >>** You are a total cunt and a massive liar. >> >> >> >>.... Phil >> >> > >Now *that's* beginning to sound like proper misogyny.--- PKB? --- JF
Reply by ●January 23, 20112011-01-23
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 23:27:40 -0600, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: |I don't know why anyone would do business in France (or most of Europe), given |their work rules. Possible local content requirements? james
Reply by ●January 23, 20112011-01-23
"krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:>On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 21:10:27 -0800, John Larkin ><jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 23:03:16 -0600, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" >><krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: >> >>>On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 18:20:55 -0800, John Larkin >>><jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> >>>>http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4212400/Xilinx-to-shutter-French-R-D-operation >>>> >>>>Yikes, this explains some stuff. I wonder how long it will take to >>>>undo the damage. >>> >>>Damage? The damage caused by closing a software development lab? >> >>I meant the damage likely *done* by that lab. We'd been speculating >>how Xininx managed to snarl up their software so thoroughly, and >>whether they will ever get it fixed. I can't imagine why they'd >>outsource something this important to France. > >I don't know why anyone would do business in France (or most of Europe), given >their work rules.Says someone from a country where unions are (almost) mandatory... Talk about work rules. Still, the French are not known for excellent engineering. Eiffel has been dead for a long time. -- Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply indicates you are not using the right tools... nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.) --------------------------------------------------------------
Reply by ●January 23, 20112011-01-23
On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 19:52:33 GMT, nico@puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote:>"krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: > >>On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 21:10:27 -0800, John Larkin >><jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>>On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 23:03:16 -0600, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" >>><krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: >>> >>>>On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 18:20:55 -0800, John Larkin >>>><jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4212400/Xilinx-to-shutter-French-R-D-operation >>>>> >>>>>Yikes, this explains some stuff. I wonder how long it will take to >>>>>undo the damage. >>>> >>>>Damage? The damage caused by closing a software development lab? >>> >>>I meant the damage likely *done* by that lab. We'd been speculating >>>how Xininx managed to snarl up their software so thoroughly, and >>>whether they will ever get it fixed. I can't imagine why they'd >>>outsource something this important to France. >> >>I don't know why anyone would do business in France (or most of Europe), given >>their work rules. > >Says someone from a country where unions are (almost) mandatory...A damned lie, except, perhaps, WRT government jobs. Twenty two states are "right to work" states, where one cannot be forced to join a union even though it is a "union shop". Fewer than one in twelve US private sector jobs are unionized (OTOH, more than one three government workers are - a real problem). Exceedingly few high-tech (engineering) jobs are union. But why should we expect other than lies from a Europeon leftist loon.>Talk about work rules. Still, the French are not known for excellent >engineering. Eiffel has been dead for a long time.
Reply by ●January 23, 20112011-01-23
Reply by ●January 23, 20112011-01-23
