I knew there'd be at least one of you guys in this thread.
1) Don't trust Go because of Google
2) Don't trust C#,F# because M$ (yes with dollar sign)
3) Don't trust Java because Oracle
4) You gotta use XXX tech, which has no jobs in your area
Yada Yada... yet is probably using VSCode or GitHub. Just ignore it.
> There is no ethical consumption under capitalism
is said to de-emphasize or criticize arguments that are centered on consumer choice which is exactly what you and GP are doing by saying
> You have no choice but to depend on big corporations for key software platforms; advising or choosing to stay away from this one or that one matters little
Same goes for trusting Vue.js instead of React (Meta) and Angular (Google).
https://www.reddit.com/r/Minecraft/comments/vjpz2w/ingame_ch...
Fuck Microsoft.
We still have copilot case in front of us.
> unconditionally trust Microsoft
But the poster I was responding to was pretty clearly saying that we should:
> unconditionally distrust Microsoft
I've signed many antitrust petitions for them over the years. And they have won a fair amount of good will since Satya came on and pushed for cultural change, as well as a larger pivot towards cloud and open source.
So, you know. It's a mixed bag is my take.
Considering their "collaboration" with Canonical, it feels like Microsoft is paying Canonical in order to get help for strangling Linux desktop inside the Windows ecosystem, finally extinguishing desktop Linux installs once and for all.
As a payback they're leaving server space to Canonical, but port their software to work on Ubuntu, so they have a suitable "free" platform to monetize their software. Canonical can make boatloads of money by selling support, Landscape and similar services meanwhile.
I'm thankful to them for their Copilot shenanigans though, they kickstarted the motivation inside me to be even more serious about the services and software I use. I left GitHub, slowly moving away from Google services, etc.
I would say that if that is your perspective, then you probably didn't have a close up view of them and how they operated before and after. There's been a lot of spilled ink about it; I won't rehash it here.
> it feels like Microsoft is paying Canonical in order to get help for strangling Linux desktop inside the Windows ecosystem, finally extinguishing desktop Linux installs once and for all.
I expounded on this in another thread - Desktop Linux isn't likely to be something MSFT spends any amount of time concerning themselves with as competition. Realistically, it's not real competition and any harms done to it probably were borne out of callousness or ignorance rather than competitive spite. The competition is OSX and ChromeOS (which I would not consider 'Desktop Linux').
I have witnessed "before" enough, so I distanced myself from them pretty sharply, and I didn't bother to check "after" that close. It's my fault, I accept it, but from this distance the end result doesn't show any meaningful differences. So, it's something to ponder if you ask me.
> Desktop Linux isn't likely to be something MSFT spends any amount of time concerning themselves with as competition.
It's may not be competition, but is a big hurdle against locking down PC ecosystem and converting them to appliances. If they can run all Linux apps under Windows, they can revoke all 3rd party signing keys, make Secure Boot mandatory and tell judges "See, it all works under Windows. We're no monopoly. We already ship the environment free with new PCs, anyway."
This stance against Microsoft is one of the rare firmly held strong opinions of mine. I certainly would prefer not hold this so firmly, but they made it impossible over the years.