RJ - According to Wikipedia:

"The initial cost estimate for Mars Direct was put at $20 billion, including
development costs. In today's terms, this equates to some $30-35 billion. In
2004, NASA and ESA undertook cost modeling exercises to review the cost of
human space missions. While neither exercise was an endorsement of Mars
Direct, both cost models found Zubrin and Baker's cost estimate to be
remarkably accurate."

30-35 billion is a far cry from 6 billion ...

"Dennis Pack" <dennispack********.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:AB9C96D7-DF64-468D-B338-9EE919024A22@microsoft.com...
> RJ:
> They were planning on using the ability to read minds, but couldn't
> dumb it down enough. Have a great day.
>
> --
> Dennis Pack
> XP x64, Vista Enterprise x64
> Office2007
> "RJ" <jackbobNOSPAM********.com> wrote in message
> news:%23tExsusPHHA.992@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> They could have financed a manned trip to Mars for that much. Instead,
>> we got Windows Vista that still uses the ancient and boring - point and
>> click at windows
>> computing. Wow - it was worth it.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Mario Rosario (info)" <mario@webacre.com> wrote in message
>> news:269A950B-B253-475A-B171-8DF937A1B563@microsoft.com...
>>> According to The San Jose Mercury News, Bill Gates was quoted to have
>>> spent 6 Billion dollars to develop Vista. According to another source,
>>> the analysts estimate 2 Billion in revenue the first year.
>>>
>>> http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/16515881.htm
>>>
>>> I have a gut feeling the next version of Windows is going to be all
>>> around very expensive.
>>>
>>> Mario
>>
>>
>