5 ms·

Just a reminder, that embrace, extend, and exterminate (aka extinguish) was both an anti-competitive strategy with collateral damage to society, and simply acti

Just a reminder, that embrace, extend, and exterminate (aka extinguish) was both an anti-competitive strategy with collateral damage to society, and simply acting with normal self-interest to help customers. Even if one believes a post-Gates/Ballmer/Myhrvold Microsoft no longer behaves illegally/unethically, one can still look forward to an embrace being followed by extension and extinguishing. Because that's how the incentives play out. Embrace: Of course we want to give our users the best, even when some of that originated elsewhere. Extend: We're not going to hold back our users by waiting on slow-moving standards bodies - often slowed by our competitors. Helping competitors isn't a priority for us. And the wellbeing of those few people who aren't our users, is understandably also not a high priority for us. Exterminate: Why should we expend any effort at all towards keeping competitors viable? Why shouldn't we actively help potential customers join us? Why should we prioritize resources to helping a few disgruntled ones leave? Why shouldn't we fully monetize our intellectual property, both directly, and through affiliated third-parties like Intellectual Ventures? Microsoft failed on phones, but VR/AR is coming, and it will transform the market for phones, laptops, and desktops. Once upon a time Microsoft created Windows-only web extensions. Now Mozilla writes them for it. Windows Everywhere may still happen. And "you can use Linux inside of Windows" is a big step towards that. It's not clear that's something to be happy about.

staticelf 9y ago
Kinda tiring to see this gets rehashed on every thread mentioning MS in any positive light. Many things Microsoft has done recently has been in the open source fashion since it's the way to do things now. The times have changed, charging monthly for services is a much better economic strategy than making people pay upfront for a product. It's clear to at least me that Linux will most likely never replace Windows as the main OS for everyday users so there is no real financial incentive to extinguish it anymore. I don't think MS cares that much anymore if you run linux or windows on the server side as long as you do it in Azure.
- mncharity 9y ago
  > Kinda tiring to see this gets rehashed on every thread mentioning MS in any positive light. This thread was on a major change in the relationship between Microsoft and Linux. But comments were focused on the short-term impact on individual developers. Pointing out longer-term ecosystem impact seemed worthwhile. > Kinda tiring to see this gets rehashed [... Microsoft has changed ...] I encounter two versions of this sentiment. One is "yes, it's unfortunate that our only choice is to pay organized crime to collect our trash, but I don't want to discuss that every time we put out the trash" (to use an example from NYC of a few decades ago). And as long that doesn't drift into "organized crime isn't a problem", fine. The other version is "Microsoft's conduct is no longer something to be concerned about". And if one knows that pharma, IBM, and Microsoft, are the current leaders in expanding the scope of software patents, and blocking patent reforms, and one agrees with those positions, then, well, ok. But often there isn't that awareness. Or other impacts are not fully appreciated, or not clearly reasoned about. We're way off the front page, and my break is short, so for the rest, I'll just note that linux is unlikely to ever work as well as windows on Azure, and MS has a strong incentive to diminish linux and Mac as a competing centers of gravity for software developers. For instance, developers being able to easily avoid Microsoft products while developing and serving android and iOS, is something Microsoft would obviously like to change. And specifically, Microsoft will do whatever it takes, to not miss VR/AR as it did phones. And would really prefer to dominate VR/AR as it does desktop/laptop.
  - staticelf 9y ago
    I didn't have deeper meaning behind what I wrote. I just think it's unnecessary to point out the stuff you did every time Microsoft does something positive. You won't see the same for other corporations like Apple, Google or Samsung for example which also holds and defends patents. Can you point out something on linux on azure that doesn't work as well as with windows? Genuinly curious. I haven't had any linux images on azure so I have really no experience in the matter. I don't think it's something wrong with them entering the VR/AR space, it is exactly what it needs. The more heavy players behind it the more faster the technology will evolve. Right now, there is still a big lack of both games and software for it so there is not a big incentive to buy such a system. I am very excited for the future of tech and I am not worried for one second about Microsoft will stop supporting open source and if they will, I would be the first to object to it [as a heavy user of their tech].

staticelf 9y ago

Kinda tiring to see this gets rehashed on every thread mentioning MS in any positive light. Many things Microsoft has done recently has been in the open source fashion since it's the way to do things now. The times have changed, charging monthly for services is a much better economic strategy than making people pay upfront for a product. It's clear to at least me that Linux will most likely never replace Windows as the main OS for everyday users so there is no real financial incentive to extinguish it anymore. I don't think MS cares that much anymore if you run linux or windows on the server side as long as you do it in Azure.

mncharity 9y ago
> Kinda tiring to see this gets rehashed on every thread mentioning MS in any positive light. This thread was on a major change in the relationship between Microsoft and Linux. But comments were focused on the short-term impact on individual developers. Pointing out longer-term ecosystem impact seemed worthwhile. > Kinda tiring to see this gets rehashed [... Microsoft has changed ...] I encounter two versions of this sentiment. One is "yes, it's unfortunate that our only choice is to pay organized crime to collect our trash, but I don't want to discuss that every time we put out the trash" (to use an example from NYC of a few decades ago). And as long that doesn't drift into "organized crime isn't a problem", fine. The other version is "Microsoft's conduct is no longer something to be concerned about". And if one knows that pharma, IBM, and Microsoft, are the current leaders in expanding the scope of software patents, and blocking patent reforms, and one agrees with those positions, then, well, ok. But often there isn't that awareness. Or other impacts are not fully appreciated, or not clearly reasoned about. We're way off the front page, and my break is short, so for the rest, I'll just note that linux is unlikely to ever work as well as windows on Azure, and MS has a strong incentive to diminish linux and Mac as a competing centers of gravity for software developers. For instance, developers being able to easily avoid Microsoft products while developing and serving android and iOS, is something Microsoft would obviously like to change. And specifically, Microsoft will do whatever it takes, to not miss VR/AR as it did phones. And would really prefer to dominate VR/AR as it does desktop/laptop.
- staticelf 9y ago
  I didn't have deeper meaning behind what I wrote. I just think it's unnecessary to point out the stuff you did every time Microsoft does something positive. You won't see the same for other corporations like Apple, Google or Samsung for example which also holds and defends patents. Can you point out something on linux on azure that doesn't work as well as with windows? Genuinly curious. I haven't had any linux images on azure so I have really no experience in the matter. I don't think it's something wrong with them entering the VR/AR space, it is exactly what it needs. The more heavy players behind it the more faster the technology will evolve. Right now, there is still a big lack of both games and software for it so there is not a big incentive to buy such a system. I am very excited for the future of tech and I am not worried for one second about Microsoft will stop supporting open source and if they will, I would be the first to object to it [as a heavy user of their tech].