[deleted]
The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux
51–60 of 112 posts
Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux
#52There is a large group of people on the internet who never let the Microsoft of the 90s go. How does every single one of their business decisions get linked to some nefarious goal? The author doesn't even know what it could be, BUT DON'T FORGET! This company tried to patent everything decades ago! Don't forget they're not bringing bash to Windows out of the goodness in their hearts!
Their recent overtures toward open source are heartening, and for me did start to overcome the reputation of the old Microsoft. I was disappointed that they squandered that good will with the Windows 10 telemetry debacle.
Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux
#53To me Microsoft has been evil long enough, instead of welcoming they "join" open source world, I'm 1000x more concerned they become a tumour and hurt the booming open source at large. Just leave OSS alone Microsoft!
Why do I keep rolling my eyes everytime I go on hacker news? Microsoft providing more free tools in their suite is nothing but nice. It certainly won't do any harm to OSS.
The Greeks providing us with this free giant horse statue is nothing but nice!
Microsoft has acted unethically from it's inception until just recently when they've been backed into a corner. For decades they've repeated shown that they're willing to damage the entire industry if it means that they end up with more control over it.
Why would you trust that this recent change of heart is permanent given that their hand was forced? When they start acting ethically when they don't have to - that's when I'll reconsider my position.
Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux
#54I don't think MS is "embracing open source" (or even necessarily rejecting it), so much as they are acknowledging that Linux servers are here to stay for a while, and simply grabbing a piece of the pie instead of ignoring it. Much like Oracle having its own Linux distro. Perhaps enough shareholders complained about a market segment simply being given to OSX (development environment for work intended for a POSIX serve…
Linux servers are here to stay for a while? Linux, and Unix and BSD, run 75 to 85% of the internet so that kind of thinking is just so wrong.
Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux
#55To me Microsoft has been evil long enough, instead of welcoming they "join" open source world, I'm 1000x more concerned they become a tumour and hurt the booming open source at large. Just leave OSS alone Microsoft!
Why do I keep rolling my eyes everytime I go on hacker news? Microsoft providing more free tools in their suite is nothing but nice. It certainly won't do any harm to OSS.
I can't believe you don't see the evil. Open your eyes. Just because a company pays 400 million for Xamarin and then open sources the Xamarin SDKs for Android, iOS, and Mac shouldn't fool you. People everywhere... revolt!
If you can't tell, I am being sarcastic. I love Microsoft. People just believe what they want to believe. I'm sure they will never change.
Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
well the thing is - Microsoft isn't a person, it's a company - as a general rule it is reasonable to assume that companies don't do anything out of the goodness of their hearts, when you also have a good deal of bad behavior in the past ( and 20 years ago can be the recent past for a company) it might make sense to keep an increase sense of skepticism.
Twenty years ago isn't "recent history" for anything in the tech industry. People who were at Microsoft back when they were "really evil" in the 90s have since WORKED AT GOOGLE (or any number of other companies you might be a fan of), and even left Google, since then. Very few people who made decisions you may be holding over them today, actually work at Microsoft today. You can legitimately hold a decision against a…
In companies, this is not as important as the general policy and vision of the group. The entity is an autonomous system greater than its parts.
Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, Microsoft signed two deals related to Android/Linux with two companies, the content of those deals are undisclosed. That's pretty much all the facts we have, and this article is trying to tell us that this is an unequivocal proof of MS racketeering the open source community, seriously? Did I miss something?
Are you suggesting MS has legitimate claims to IP used in android? Patent trolling isn't something new to MS, so why would anyone reasonably assume MS isn't patent trolling in the absence of all the facts when we have plenty of information and historical data to make reasonable presumptions?
> Are you suggesting MS has legitimate claims to IP used in android?
Are you suggesting that MS has no legitimate claims to IP used in android? It seems to me that companies wouldn't do thee deals if there was no case to answer. It's not as though (for example) Samsung was a stranger to court action, and it's a much bigger company than Microsoft.
It's also a fact that Microsoft pioneered Unix on PCs in the early 1980s, and that Xenix was the most popular Unix of its day....
"Long before Linus Torvalds was able to write anything useful in C, there was a version of Unix from Microsoft called XENIX that was based on the seventh edition and BSD 4.1 with some interesting enhancements (multiple virtual consoles accessible via Alt-F1, Alt-F2,... Alt-F10 -- later inherited by Linux, record-locking facilities for database programming, etc) and an amazing level of PC friendliness that Linus will try emulate much later by essentially replicating all major design decisions that Microsoft put into XENIX for PC but using an independent codebase." http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Torvalds/Finland_period/x...
Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux
#58There is a large group of people on the internet who never let the Microsoft of the 90s go. How does every single one of their business decisions get linked to some nefarious goal? The author doesn't even know what it could be, BUT DON'T FORGET! This company tried to patent everything decades ago! Don't forget they're not bringing bash to Windows out of the goodness in their hearts!
Microsoft was also fined $2 billion dollars by the EU in 2004 for anti-trust violations so it's not just the 1990s.
In addition, Microsoft was under US Federal oversight until 2011, but then had it extended another two years for failure to comply with the original court order. So let's not forget that.
Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
You talk like developing on Linux means doing everything in the command line. *nix UX is nothing to be ashamed of, and I personally prefer it over Windows and OS X (especially OS X).
Personally, the reason I like OS X over a random linux distribution is the sane keyboard shortcut defaults - CMD+C and CMD+V just work everywhere, as well as things like CMD+W. Well, almost everywhere. And CTRL+F is still a little wonky depending on the app you're in.
Where on Linux do Ctrl-c, v, and x not work? I haven't had a problem with them anywhere in a decade. I have largely stuck to Gnome2, MATE, and XFCE, though.
Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux
#60The author quoted Shuttleworth: > The native availability of a full Ubuntu environment on Windows, without virtualization or emulation, is a milestone that defies convention and a gateway to fascinatingly unfamiliar territory. "Ubuntu environment" is the key there. Microsoft doesn't need "Linux" unless they're planning on replacing their own kernel with it. Microsoft here is depending on the software running atop of…
If we end up with fully comatible gnu/linux and gnu/windows, that's still awesome, maybe even better than ending up with only linux variants.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace%2C_extend_and_extingui...
Count me as being trapped in the 90s.