I was curious what the Linux people think about Microsoft and any bad practices that most people should know about already?
Came here to say this. They wrote the playbook that has spelled the end or at least shitification of so many standards, open-source or otherwise(but usually still free-to-use or at least cheap).
IIRC It's on their Wikipedia
Microsoft is definitely the corpoest of them all.
Probably not the worst corpo, likely even, but out of the corpos, they are the most corpo corpo of any corpo.
Ok but look on the bright side of things! you get great futures with this big tech concentration and control of the market. For instance, who else doesn't want a operating system hotkey to Linkedin, baked into their settings? How did I use a computer without that before?!
Worse than Apple?
Apple is highly restrictive on their OS and over priced. They are extremely pro consumerism with heavy marketing and engineered obsolescence to ensure you are always pressured to buy their new tech, and they are historically very strongly anti-right-to-repair.
Microsoft is bad. But at least they are primarily a software monopoly.
Fortunately I have a ladder
I'm not sure, at least the unrepairable mess made by Microsoft is software rather than hardware - you can reinstall a janky OS but you can't unexplode a phone that disassembled itself when you sneezed in its general direction.
There's no fine line between the two companies.
Edit: they continuously fucked up Halo in unexcusable ways, fuck them, they're worse than Apple. Forgot about that.
Yes. Microsoft is the king of “good enough” software. DOS was good enough (and had a free C compiler!). Windows gets the job done 95% of the time when it’s not freezing up or needing rebooting. Office is okay - and nothing else is 100% compatible so you get a bonus of vendor lock-in. New features are few and far between, as are bug fixes for non-critical issues.
You left out that they refuse to let end users control updates on the system unless they resort to hacky bullshit (and even that doesn't work consistently). As far as I know (and have experienced on Windows Server) this extends to enterprise as well.
pushing for a move from “Free” to “Open Source.”
Can you explain more? Is that related to the clown gpl guys criticizing BSD/MIT/ISC license and laugh on FreeBSD for letting Apple to do whatever I can't remember?
Thanks.
Open source software has its source code published. It doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re able to copy some or all of it, modify it, distribute it, etc.
GPL as an example.
Free software can be freely copied, modified, distributed, etc
If you are citing the GNU's website, you should remove the "modified". I'd quote a mailing list user:
Say if OpenSSH was licenced under (A)GPL, companies would likely not use it because they wouldn't be able to incorporate it into their IP, they would then try to code a shoddy implementation, and have numerous security bugs which would affect the end user. In other words, you are just shooting yourself in the foot.
Thank you.
pretty much.
If you need a point for developers: all public code repositories hosted on GitHub are harvested, at least in 2021, and used to train copilot regardless of their license. Furthermore, GitHub is OWNED by Microsoft now.
Microsoft has been building the O365 platform to lock out competitors and locking users into an ecosystem that is difficult to leave. They systematically eliminate competition and have pushed to create laws that make competition harder. In embrace extend extinguish, they are in phase 3, which is a massive red flag. They also started putting out spyware and malware into their software and have proven they can't maintain security; making them a bad actor in a position of power. Scale is debatable, but Microsoft is undeniably evil in 2024.
A coworker recently sent me a Word document with edits and comments they had added. When I downloaded & opened it (in Word on Windows!) it told me that it had the edits/comments but it wouldn't let me see them unless I log in to my Microsoft account and then view it online in the web version of Word. What the actual fuck?
Fuck that. I responded to my coworker and asked them to just send me the edits via email in plain text. I'm not winning popularity contests at work, but what the fuck Microsoft?
my favorite bit was how no one at microsoft actually understood their own licensing pricing. for decades, you could call microsoft for pricing and get different answer from people in cubicles next to each other or even from your own rep.
it was as if they were making it up as needed.
Windows is the worst thing that ever happened to computer science.
And I don't exaclly mean the product itself, but the mindset and habits that came with it.
See the other comment.
The problem is that they took Nintendo’s button names (ABXY) and transposed their positions. It’s utter chaos, and very hard for me at least to remember that A is B and B is A.
Almost every emulator lets you remap buttons on your controller. There is nothing that stops you from mapping the buttons based on position instead of what the face button says. There are also plenty of controllers you can use on PCs that have the Nintendo layout.
Microsoft abuses their de facto monopoly to engage in gross invasion of their users' privacy, and continues to try to wrest their users' control of their system from them by altering system settings after updates, and making some settings nearly impossible to change. And that's to say nothing of MS's attempts to turn their operating system into and advertising platform.
Why did you link to the Microsoft website?
In case people didn’t know what company he was referring to. /s
They coined the term Embrace, Extend, Extinguish and they haven't stopped enforcing it. I haz not much faith on WSL and similar.
Maybe I'm going crazy but I feel like I've been seeing this post or an identical one for many days, maybe even a week, yet the age is still one day.
Still, fuck MS and all.
Microsoft is about as bad as any other proprietary software company. They do some good things for the open source economy, but they also mistreat their users.
I think it's a mistake to look at the free software movement as being a reaction against Microsoft or Google. It's against the proprietary software world in general.
First they tried to destroy FOSS, then they realized that they can make money and gain control using open source software, so now they pretend to support it. Microsoft is a monopolistic piece of garbage that I'm staying away from at all costs.
I don't think they're pretending. Open source software is a valuable resource for basically all major tech companies, and a lot of it is driven by major tech companies. Some kind of combination of open source and proprietary software will always be a thing for them. This isn't some major contradiction, they use either model based on the specific needs of the project.
This is why some think "Open Source" is too permissive since they see it as free/cheap labor to be exploited by huge corporations.
I'm not sure that I see it that way, but I can see their point.
It's not as if they are holding themselves up as supporting Free Software philosophies (as opposed to Open Source), so where's the pretense?
If somehow it ever makes strategic sense for them to stop making use of the open source model, yeah, they'll stop. That doesn't mean they were pretending.
Extinguish, fail, extend, embrace, extinguish again!
"Rinse and repeat"
Lets talk about THEIR carbon footprint while creating "equality" and new "bussiness opportunities"
They do this because we pay them to.
The whole fuckery around OOXML is what finally pushed me in in to open source and ultimately Linux.
As a shareholder (which I'm not), it's absolutely amazing.
As a human being though... it's simple to look at the history of the company, from its inception based on nepotism and locking-down was hitherto the common good, to going from one place of monopoly (OS, app, cloud) to another (extending to whatever is trendy at the moment e.g XR with HoloLens, AI with OpenAI, etc).
It's IMHO one of the very worst thing that could have happened to humanity in terms of cognitive empowerment. Apple is not far behind but in terms of locking up an entire ecosystem but Microsoft, sadly, is doing it better.
To clarify what I mean is that Microsoft is the business embodiment of learned helplessness. Most people would shrug at the quality of software they provide, the price, etc ONLY because they are convinced, wrongfully so, that they are is no legitimate alternative. If users were actually able to chose, not being coerced into but properly chose, by experiencing alternatives, the World would be totally different. Instead of having computer users who feel an adversarial relationship to their devices, we would have a much stronger relation of "this is MY device" the same way a lot (not all) of people have a repair toolbox at home. They know they can try to fix something in THEIR home, even improve it. Most people understand it won't be easy, they might mess it up, but it's possible to try. Not in software, and that's entirely Microsoft "success". Maybe in an alternative reality others, like Apple, would have made that happen to, but in our reality I blame Microsoft, Bill Gates upbringing from his legal mindset father and well connected mother.
We could have a world were users own their devices, have a challenging yet empowering relationship to technology, starting with software, and instead we have exploitative learning helplnessness. So yes, Microsoft is that bad.
I think overall they are not better or worse than other tech giants. They try to be the platform for blank and thus to push competitors out of the marked, or lock it down so they can't enter. They try to extract as much money from their customers as they can, even if it makes the user experience worse. They push the boundaries of what the can legally do. They charge you, but you don't own anything.
What really grinds my gears is how they try to force stuff on me that I don't fucking want. I feel like they are completely different in that regard than for example Google. I use Google Maps because I want to. I don't use Chrome because I don't want to. It's that easy. They don't ask me to reconsider, they don't make it super complicated to switch, nothing. I can disable any Google App and forget about it.
To stick with the Google comparison, I also feel like Google informs me better and gives me more control regarding my data. This feels much more hidden on convoluted in MS products in general. For example I had no idea Office is basically spyware before reading about it elsewhere. In Google-land, they seem much more upfront about what they use and what I can opt out from (or in to).
I don't think about Microsoft at all mostly. I supported their stuff professionally in the past and friends/family but otherwise total avoidance. They own some big game studios so I probably use some of their products like Minecraft but I haven't used their operating systems or applications for decades and I dislike and distrust cloud services and theirs is no exception. All big companies tend to be the same. Try not to depend on any of them.
No offence, but have you been living under a Microsoft shaped rock for the past 30 years?
Are you a Eggplant?
Consider this; you were taught Microsoft in school as it's used in work environments, Microsoft is used in work environments as it's taught in schools or the person making the decision was only taught one product.
Why do you think Microsoft is giving free upgrades from windows 10 to 11, same thing from XP upwards. It's vendor lock in, and that's bad for many reasons
Average Reddit comment.
You: 🤡
What is the point of your comment? The person asked what the Linux community thinks about Microsoft and you come with this idiotic CiRcLeJerk bs? You didn't add anything to the thread.
I've learnt a bunch of horrible practices done by MS that I wasn't aware of so thank you everybody else.
If you have been on lemmy for any amount of time, "Microsoft bad" is posted almost daily. I'm not disagreeing, yes they are bad. It's super circle jerky to post a whole thread literally asking something that is posted in comments/other posts literally daily. It's fine I just find it funny lol
Yep. Come join in.
Don't forget Oracle.
Microsoft has basically taken almost all businesses in the world hostage.
Once your staff is trained on MS products and your own stuff is fully connected to Azure, you're trapped and they can adjust prices to just below what you can bear.
Microsoft doesn't need a monopoly in the dying consumer desktop market anymore. That's why they're the top contributor to the Linux kernel, integrated a Linux layer into their OS, offer to save documents in an open format in Office, and host articles on how to install Linux in their documentation.
The year of the Linux desktop has finally come. Everyone who doesn't still run Windows 7, now has a Unix system installed on their PCs (and all other devices). It's just one that's distributed by Google, Microsoft or Apple.
Are you talking about Microsoft or Amazon?
Honestly its easier to switch from Word to Writer than EC2 to another provider
I like Micsrosofts office suite, but I hate virtually everything else. I got tired of their recent decisions and bought an Apple laptop, partly because I'm getting into iOS development and wanted that experience. But my other computer is dual booted with Fedora and Windows for when I absolutely need Windows, I'll swap over, bit rarely do I outside of some gaming.
There is a possibility of having 0.01% shit in the sandwitch from water used in it due to some leakage from a toilet tank. Would you not eat it?
Also yeah who known houseflys sit on shit and land on sandwitch at some point in time
jk i agree with your point tho
Ah yeah sorry lol i misinterpreted
This thread teaches me that generally, most Linux people are looking at windows. Meanwhile Microsoft only thinks Windows is 16% of its business.
Basically, it seems, most Linux users do not think hard about Microsoft.
You're right. Both cloud services (like Microsoft 365 measured by licensing) and azure each individually are about double Windows. They together make over half of Microsoft's earnings while Windows is like 16%. Then you've got games and linkedin and others filling up the smaller %.
Microsoft doesn't need Windows, you can run your office 365 off Mac or Linux for all they care. Just host all your virtual workloads on azure regardless of OS if it's not serverless, and they're fine with taking that money.
The death of Windows means more people will come to Linux
Also mean more commercial distros. Less donations to BSDs projects.
And it also increase the strength of Apple and Google, do you want to see that?
There is a lot out there on why from a lot of sources, so definitely not hard to do research on this. Definitely research the history of this company regarding anti-competition, Bill Gate's letter to hobbyists regarding intellectual property and markets (which touches on the whole proprietary vs FOSS suff). You can also just use their products for a while and see for yourself, note what you like and what you don't like (for me the latter is more likely), and make your own judgement.
Very bad
Obsolete? Hardly. The Surface, GamePass, Xbox, GitHub, Skype and just general market dominance says otherwise. They only lost their effective monopoly due to antitrust lawsuits.
Currently, there's lots of better options out there, true, but it's far from obsolete.
It's Teams, now.
I can't remember
Microsoft just like many other big tech companies are shoehorning AI into everything. It's a new fad, and if it isn't a fad, this is how idiocracy starts IRL.
They took down the fucking don't be evil sign! Google used to be a good company but I don't trust their actions. I've only found out about the spyware level chrome browser, not to mention that Google has been coloring my searches on the internet.
But what do I expect from a ADVERTISING company first and for most?
Don't authenticate to a search engine.
youtube needs you to sign in to watch videos now
I personally have no problem with people using Windows but I don't want it shoved down my throat. When people first boot their computer they should have the option to choose what OS to install (Windows, various Linux distros, and FreeBSD) and that choice should always be available in the bios.
I don't think the world is black or white. Of course Microsoft can make bad choices and prioritize profit, but Microsoft isn't a person or and entity. MS is an enterprise driven by people that work there.
Linux community or any other community can also make bad choices, afterall it's also people-driven and people are flawed.
I don't excuse MS for really bad choices, but also don't blame it. I just think that's better to see the world complex as it is, not by judging stuff as 'bad' or 'good'.
While I can see the merit of your sentiment here, and would generally agree the world exists on a spectrum and not some binary scale of yes or no, black or white. Like others have said, with mottos like "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" how can one ignore the bad that Microsoft brings to the table.
One pet peeve of mine is how in Windows 10 switching between virtual desktops was flawless, and somehow in Windows 11 they fucked it up. At first it had no animation when switching, the taskbar kind of glitches. Now it has an animation but it's kind of delayed and the taskbar still kind of glitches, it seems to reload or something. Kinda crazy honestly
Maybe it's just the hardware I've tried to use it on but it always seemed to take too long for me in 10, too (haven't used 11). Whether trackpad gesture or win+tab, it's just always seemed sluggish compared to other options.
How bad are we that M$ still has 75% market share on operation systems and office suites?
What's your point? At one moment in history everybody would buy leaded fuel. That's my strawmen reply to your strawmen.
Microsoft is really good at getting rich selling terrible software that performs worse than even freeware in the same category. They have full market dominance, and therefore produce nothing but overpriced junk.
I feel like the authors of this site may be biased, though.
Worse than theyve been as is most every other massive conglomerate still in business since inception. As the adage goes, power corrupts. Absolutely immutable if the rest of the corporate world is any example
What does "bad" means to you exactly? They are the hypocrites just like any big corporation, value only money, they reinvent wheels all the time, but their products pretty good despite being non-free, and making programs is much easier for Windows then GNU/Linux.
It would be even better if they didn't force you to use only their products.
You value simplicity or free of choice and privacy? The "bad" definition depends on it.
It really depends on your perspective if windows is „easier“ to produce for. They are fully and redundantly vertically integrated which means they have the means to produce IDEs and even create programming languages.
But it is hugely easier to create a small app on linux imo. The simplicity of linux and the modularity of the different desktop environments is pretty great.
Is it tech illiterate friendly like windows? No! It would be great if everyone would be able to use linux now but we‘re gonna have to be patient.
In this particular case I meant that linux is the same in all regards: open source. You can look everything up if you have the time. This makes it possible to change everything and anything you need. Even through different DEs you still have the same structure.
Now if you go try that with windows, you‘re properly hosed. Different package manager? No! Different desktop environment? No!
Simple might not have been the best choice of words though. Modularity might be better.
My last straw was the privacy and lack of control.
I didn't like software being released by Microsoft telling me my choices were bad or unoptimal, I like my software, I made my choices from listening to others and forming my own opinion. I had a shift in thinking recently, I wanted to start selecting my software based on my values rather than just choosing whatever works.
Impossible to know it, there isn't any other corporation who fight with M$, it is a perfect monopoly so it's impossible to figure out a world without it.
My point could be: you can't compare the actual reality to a hypothetical reality because the hypothetical reality isn't real. So how can you know it exactly?
I was curious what the Linux people think about Microsoft
Basically two teams (applied to anyone that are "speaking", e.g writing propaganda blogs, comments, etc; they don't necessary need to have all of this properties, and they may have both teams' properties):
Pro microsoft, pro systemd, pro bsod, pro administrator, pro "security" (privsec.dev pro microsoft edge), pro ms office, pro wine, anti apple/mac, anti (a)gpl, pro .net, pro powershell, .....
anti microsoft, anti windows culture, anti systemd, anti msedge, anti powershell & cmd, anti conio.h, anti bsd/mit/isc, anti company sponsorship ....
Team 3: BSD: receive donation from every entities and work on their clean operating system and software they give everyone for free without restriction; FreeBSD has been looked down by the anti-company anti-apple anti-permissive-licenses clowns
Expressed by Theo de Raadt (OpenBSD): "Linux people do what they do because they hate Microsoft. We do what we do because we love Unix."
Join team 3!
And, you cannot make the world better by just destroy A company, Microsoft. You must destroy all of them, or don't destroy any, because it can only make the existing company to compete more fierce, and because OpenBSD needs donation from Google, Microsoft, and Meta to keep working on OpenSSH and other great software those companies need! They don't need clowns to look up nor look down them, like when those clown looks down FreeBSD because they received something from Apple that I cannot figure out what.
Congratulations for not being in any team!
I've written more clearly that you must be a writer to join team 1 or 2. Keep going on your project, and ignore those who are fanatical and like to meddle in other people's affairs, like the guys who want a project to refuse donations and contributions from some specific or all company.
@lemmy.ml
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
go to feed...
@lemmy.ml
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
go to feed...
Embrace, extend, extinguish
save