There’s not a single reference on that page that’s less than 20 years old. Yes, Microsoft did some anticompetitive stuff back when Bill Gates was CEO, but it’s absurd to suggest that that still “informs what their future actions are likely to be”. A lot has changed since the 1990s.
What has changed which means they should be forgiven or trusted during these 20 years? What does a Linux subsystem for Windows prove? They want users to run Linux apps in Windows so their users will be less tempted to not use Windows… so they can add more anti features for profit.
I guess you are completely unaware of the fact that a huge chunk of the Azure infrastructure runs on linux now. MS also knows that in the enterprise space, companies use linux in their server infrastructure also, so their employees need to be able to work in linx as well. MS has versions of SQL and I believe also exchange that run on linux. WSL isn’t just about appease neckbeard wannabes.
I don’t understand why MS using Linux gives you trust in MS. MS leaked documents (over 20 years ago too) showed they considered free software a serious competitior (including Linux). Makes sense they would use it, so what?
I was working in the industry like I do now when that happened. I was disappointed the antitrust trial didn’t break up MS into three companies. Things have changed there. I guess we should dig into your past and hold everything you’ve did 20 years ago against you?
Ballmer was the driving force behind that mentality and he’s been gone from MS for a very long time.
Would breaking up big tech software companies have the same effect as it does with regular companies? I can’t shake the idea it won’t really work. People don’t want the 2nd best free (gratis) mapping software.
I guess we should dig into your past and hold everything you’ve did 20 years ago against you?
If one has not tried to sincerely make amends or doesn’t appear to have changed then it’s resonable take past actions into consideration?? I still see Microsoft making anti-consumer moves and they ain’t making Windows free software (free as in freedom).
There’s not a single reference on that page that’s less than 20 years old. Yes, Microsoft did some anticompetitive stuff back when Bill Gates was CEO, but it’s absurd to suggest that that still “informs what their future actions are likely to be”. A lot has changed since the 1990s.
What has changed which means they should be forgiven or trusted during these 20 years? What does a Linux subsystem for Windows prove? They want users to run Linux apps in Windows so their users will be less tempted to not use Windows… so they can add more anti features for profit.
I guess you are completely unaware of the fact that a huge chunk of the Azure infrastructure runs on linux now. MS also knows that in the enterprise space, companies use linux in their server infrastructure also, so their employees need to be able to work in linx as well. MS has versions of SQL and I believe also exchange that run on linux. WSL isn’t just about appease neckbeard wannabes.
I don’t understand why MS using Linux gives you trust in MS. MS leaked documents (over 20 years ago too) showed they considered free software a serious competitior (including Linux). Makes sense they would use it, so what?
I was working in the industry like I do now when that happened. I was disappointed the antitrust trial didn’t break up MS into three companies. Things have changed there. I guess we should dig into your past and hold everything you’ve did 20 years ago against you?
Ballmer was the driving force behind that mentality and he’s been gone from MS for a very long time.
Would breaking up big tech software companies have the same effect as it does with regular companies? I can’t shake the idea it won’t really work. People don’t want the 2nd best free (gratis) mapping software.
If one has not tried to sincerely make amends or doesn’t appear to have changed then it’s resonable take past actions into consideration?? I still see Microsoft making anti-consumer moves and they ain’t making Windows free software (free as in freedom).