Comment by stirfrykitty
7 years ago
This may be true, but I don't want MS having ANY say on what goes into a Linux or FreeBSD OS. None. They have an agenda that doesn't fit in well with FOSS. May no mistake about it, driving everything so that it works with Azure/VS, whatever, is about staying relevant in a world that is largely leaving them behind. Short of having to write PS at work (required), I haven't run anything MS at home since 1998 and have no need to do so. EEE is alive and well. Ask why they want *nix compatibility so bad. To extend their hegemony into everything. There is nothing MS offers that I need. Nothing. I'm about to set up a shop for some people that is completely and utterly MS free. Cost will be only the HW. No software license costs. Freedom to do whatever. No stupid, arbitrary concurrent connection limits. FOSS all the way.
> This may be true, but I don't want MS having ANY say on what goes into a Linux or FreeBSD OS. None. They have an agenda that doesn't fit in well with FOSS.
False. MS is now one of the leading FOSS contributors. You're living in the past.
My living in the past is YOUR opinion. There are many millions of FOSS users who are highly opposed to MS having any influence whatsoever on FOSS. They have an agenda and it's never in the best interest of the FOSS crowd. Do you think they are doing what they do out of benevolence? It's done for MS software compatibility with FOSS, so users will choose Azure and their other cloud offerings. It's done purely to keep them in the game and relevant. No other reason. I heavily distrust MS, as over the years they have given many reasons not to trust them. Ever wonder why so many people abandoned GitHub after MS bought them?