8 ms·

There's a lot of people on HN and reddit who don't understand the scepticism some people have for microsoft. But actually, I wouldn't even say things have chan

by dm319 8y ago

There's a lot of people on HN and reddit who don't understand the scepticism some people have for microsoft. But actually, I wouldn't even say things have changed that much recently - Windows 10 was born into controversy with both the forced upgrades and spying. Skype didn't happen too long ago, nor did Nokia. I also like this post here[1] from reddit about some of the earlier evils of Microsoft's leadership. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3aicvf/what_villain_lived_long_enough_to_see_themselves/csd2rrl/ https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3aicvf/what_vill... I know there is an open-source movement going on with MS, but I inherently don't trust them - they've got prior form and still have the power to shift the software landscape even more in their favour.

SideburnsOfDoom 8y ago
Holding big companies to high standards is a great idea. But why single out Microsoft? Do you hold Google, Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Alibaba to the same sceptical standard? 1998 was 20 years ago. Even if Microsoft somehow hadn't changed, the biggest concentrations of power reside elsewhere now. I don't understand the scepticism some people have for Microsoft and only Microsoft. It seems like living in the past.
- philliphaydon 8y ago
  Facebook and Google scare me more, Microsoft has desperately being trying to turn a new leaf, but no matter what they do, the same old people are beating drums from the before time.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 8y ago
    Quite. If you want to talk about "prior form" and "the power to shift the landscape", then there's Facebook over the last few years. It's a bigger danger, and much more recent.
  - pmoriarty 8y ago
    "Microsoft has desperately being trying to turn a new leaf, but no matter what they do, the same old people are beating drums from the before time." What are we supposed to do, pretend their sociopathic history didn't happen? Actions have consequences, and one of those consequences is that informed people try to remember the lessons of the past so that the mistakes of the past are not repeated. We're not talking about some company with an untarnished history that should be given the benefit of the doubt. Microsoft has to earn back its trust. It's not going to be handed it on a silver platter by those of us with a memory. Founders and CEOs of HN take note: This is what happens when you fuck the community in the ass.
    - StaticRedux 8y ago
      "Actions have consequences" Yep. And in today's world, those consequences seem to be all or nothing, death penalty forever with no forgiveness or forgetting, no matter what, or let them completely off the hook and pretend like you don't know anything at all. The same people calling for everyone to always remember what Microsoft did 20 years ago log out of HN and go work on their Facebook React app with no apparent sense of irony. So while you are reminding everyone of how terrible Microsoft was 20 years ago, you should probably be shutting down your Facebook, Instagram, and Google accounts, throwing away your Android phone, deleting any projects you have that use React.js, TypeScript, Angular, Go, Dart, and a lot more, and generally cleaning out everything that isn't completely FOSS from your life. Bc if you aren't, then you really don't give a crap about Microsoft's behavior, you just care about looking cool by talking shit about Microsoft and everyone knowing how knowledgeable you are about their history from 20 years ago, even if you are willfully ignoring the same and worse behavior by many, many companies today.
      - pdkl95 8y ago
        > The same people calling for everyone to always remember what Microsoft did 20 years ago log out of HN and go work on their Facebook React app with no apparent sense of irony. This is a straw man. You're arguing against a group that is largely fictional. > you should probably be shutting down your Facebook, Instagram, and Google accounts Some of us learned from previous bad actors like Microsoft and never made accounts with the new generation fo bad actors. > throwing away your Android phone I've been trying to educate people about the dangers of carrying a tracking device for ~25 years. In the last ~year, some people have finally started to listen. > deleting any projects you have that use React.js, TypeScript, Angular, Go, Dart Do you really think we would depend on any remotely proprietary language/library/etc after spending years fighting Microsoft? There are numerous tools available without proprietary baggage.
  - gregknicholson 8y ago
    I already avoided GitHub because it was proprietary and trying to centralise open source software development. You shouldn't be obliged to do business with one particular company if you want to contribute to open source software. It doesn't matter how benevolent the owner is. Nothing has changed.
- kop316 8y ago
  I can't speak for the parent comment, but I certainly do: - Amazon has completely ruined my trust with their constant fake review issue and their counterfeit issue. - Google does the "embrace, extend, extinguish" issue. Try running an Android phone without Google Play Services. Try using U2F on any site BUT Google (I have a Yubikey U2F that works on GitHub, Nextcloud, and a few other sites with Firefox, but mysteriously does not work on Google except for Chrome). That doesn't even mention their dark patterns when opting out of their data collection, or their horrible customer service if they lock you out of your Google account, or their tendency to kill off services seemingly at random. - Apple has had a storied history of locking one into their ecosystem, and makes me skeptical to buy anything by them. I also find it even more troubling that they have no problem giving all PRC users data to the PRC government, just so they have access to that market. - I won't bother to address Facebook here, as they have had so much recent (and continued) controversy. - I admittedly have never used Alibaba, so I don't know enough to talk to that. I think there are other people who have similar issues with those companies, and I have seen them discussed here.
- dredmorbius 8y ago
  Whatabboutism. The story concerns Microsoft. And I do. Tech monopolies are bad, mkay?
- s2g 8y ago
  because hating M$ has been the cool thing to do for decades. Look how cool I am with my use of $ in M$.
Leon 8y ago
> forced upgrades I think the forced upgrades were a good thing. The security model on Windows 10 and continued support of updates to 10 is overall a Good Thing for the average Windows User. The majority of users on Windows run their systems in extremely non-secure ways and skip updates and upgrades completely. This is a danger to the internet as a whole. To me it ultimately comes down to this: I can't force my older relatives to update their machines or even stop them from running ancient versions of Windows. On that front, Windows 10 made things better.
- iajrz 8y ago
  That's a nice take - it's still understandable that many of us would rather be in control of the software we're using, though, isn't it? It's - irksome. If one of my prod servers were forcefully updated - with no warning, therefore no chance to make backups - I'd be furious. If my main dev machine was bricked as a result of forceful updates, as I seem to recall it happened to some folk... It feels like they disregard users in that sense, and it's sad.
  - the_hoser 8y ago
    I think this is a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" kind of situation. On the one hand, the user definitely thinks it's in their best interest to be in control of their software. On the other hand, history has shown that the average user doesn't make good decisions when it comes to said software. Microsoft will catch the blame for the insecure operating system, or they'll catch the blame for forcing users to update their software. I'm no Microsoft fan, but I really do believe they did the less-wrong thing in this case.
    - gnud 8y ago
      The forced upgrade would be less of a problem if Win10 didn't spy so much, or show ads in the start menu. It would still be a problem, but less so.
      - the_hoser 8y ago
ryanackley 8y ago
I'm not a Microsoft fan but I don't get two of your examples. Nokia was on the path to obsolescence before Microsoft purchased the failing company. Nokia lost more than $3 billion dollars in 2012. You don't spend billions of dollars to purchase a failing company and then intentionally fail some more. Skype works the same as it always has for me and I pay them nothing. Are you upset that Skype hasn't moved forward at all? That seems like a valid criticism but hardly "evil". The stuff they did in the 90's was true evil. They actively sabotaged competitive technology and companies. Making agreements in bad faith was part of their corporate culture. They considered open source a cancer they were trying to snuff out.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- dorkusmcgavin 8y ago
  For Skype, the real complaints (maybe not here) are the structure and ways Skype works. Originally, Skype was a P2P communications platform, even for calls. After Microsoft acquired it, it was pushed into a centralized model. This goes against some fundamental concepts of how the internet is supposed to work, and the main benefits are mostly for Microsoft and not necessarily for users. Data acquisition of random call monitoring (for "quality"), government snooping (PRISM), and to integrate Skype into things like Xbox. We should be moving more in the direction of federated protocols, but instead we are moving towards more and more centralization in tech and as well as in our society. This also has security implications with data consolidation, data sharing, etc.
- guitarbill 8y ago
  Well, it isn't only Nokia, it's in the context of Microsoft's whole mobile strategy where they were more than happy to fuck over their own users. For example, the Windows Phone running version 7 could not be upgraded to 8. Or that it took them over two years to port Skype (which they owned) to Windows Phone. Meanwhile, it was available on iOS. This was all around 2010 and after. Not in the 90s. So Nokia is just shorthand for how clueless they were in this space.
- wila 8y ago

by dm319 8y ago

SideburnsOfDoom 8y ago

Holding big companies to high standards is a great idea. But why single out Microsoft? Do you hold Google, Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Alibaba to the same sceptical standard? 1998 was 20 years ago. Even if Microsoft somehow hadn't changed, the biggest concentrations of power reside elsewhere now. I don't understand the scepticism some people have for Microsoft and only Microsoft. It seems like living in the past.

philliphaydon 8y ago
Facebook and Google scare me more, Microsoft has desperately being trying to turn a new leaf, but no matter what they do, the same old people are beating drums from the before time.
- SideburnsOfDoom 8y ago
  Quite. If you want to talk about "prior form" and "the power to shift the landscape", then there's Facebook over the last few years. It's a bigger danger, and much more recent.
- pmoriarty 8y ago
  "Microsoft has desperately being trying to turn a new leaf, but no matter what they do, the same old people are beating drums from the before time." What are we supposed to do, pretend their sociopathic history didn't happen? Actions have consequences, and one of those consequences is that informed people try to remember the lessons of the past so that the mistakes of the past are not repeated. We're not talking about some company with an untarnished history that should be given the benefit of the doubt. Microsoft has to earn back its trust. It's not going to be handed it on a silver platter by those of us with a memory. Founders and CEOs of HN take note: This is what happens when you fuck the community in the ass.
  - StaticRedux 8y ago
    "Actions have consequences" Yep. And in today's world, those consequences seem to be all or nothing, death penalty forever with no forgiveness or forgetting, no matter what, or let them completely off the hook and pretend like you don't know anything at all. The same people calling for everyone to always remember what Microsoft did 20 years ago log out of HN and go work on their Facebook React app with no apparent sense of irony. So while you are reminding everyone of how terrible Microsoft was 20 years ago, you should probably be shutting down your Facebook, Instagram, and Google accounts, throwing away your Android phone, deleting any projects you have that use React.js, TypeScript, Angular, Go, Dart, and a lot more, and generally cleaning out everything that isn't completely FOSS from your life. Bc if you aren't, then you really don't give a crap about Microsoft's behavior, you just care about looking cool by talking shit about Microsoft and everyone knowing how knowledgeable you are about their history from 20 years ago, even if you are willfully ignoring the same and worse behavior by many, many companies today.
    - pdkl95 8y ago
      > The same people calling for everyone to always remember what Microsoft did 20 years ago log out of HN and go work on their Facebook React app with no apparent sense of irony. This is a straw man. You're arguing against a group that is largely fictional. > you should probably be shutting down your Facebook, Instagram, and Google accounts Some of us learned from previous bad actors like Microsoft and never made accounts with the new generation fo bad actors. > throwing away your Android phone I've been trying to educate people about the dangers of carrying a tracking device for ~25 years. In the last ~year, some people have finally started to listen. > deleting any projects you have that use React.js, TypeScript, Angular, Go, Dart Do you really think we would depend on any remotely proprietary language/library/etc after spending years fighting Microsoft? There are numerous tools available without proprietary baggage.
- gregknicholson 8y ago
  I already avoided GitHub because it was proprietary and trying to centralise open source software development. You shouldn't be obliged to do business with one particular company if you want to contribute to open source software. It doesn't matter how benevolent the owner is. Nothing has changed.
kop316 8y ago
I can't speak for the parent comment, but I certainly do: - Amazon has completely ruined my trust with their constant fake review issue and their counterfeit issue. - Google does the "embrace, extend, extinguish" issue. Try running an Android phone without Google Play Services. Try using U2F on any site BUT Google (I have a Yubikey U2F that works on GitHub, Nextcloud, and a few other sites with Firefox, but mysteriously does not work on Google except for Chrome). That doesn't even mention their dark patterns when opting out of their data collection, or their horrible customer service if they lock you out of your Google account, or their tendency to kill off services seemingly at random. - Apple has had a storied history of locking one into their ecosystem, and makes me skeptical to buy anything by them. I also find it even more troubling that they have no problem giving all PRC users data to the PRC government, just so they have access to that market. - I won't bother to address Facebook here, as they have had so much recent (and continued) controversy. - I admittedly have never used Alibaba, so I don't know enough to talk to that. I think there are other people who have similar issues with those companies, and I have seen them discussed here.
dredmorbius 8y ago
Whatabboutism. The story concerns Microsoft. And I do. Tech monopolies are bad, mkay?
s2g 8y ago
because hating M$ has been the cool thing to do for decades. Look how cool I am with my use of $ in M$.

Leon 8y ago

> forced upgrades I think the forced upgrades were a good thing. The security model on Windows 10 and continued support of updates to 10 is overall a Good Thing for the average Windows User. The majority of users on Windows run their systems in extremely non-secure ways and skip updates and upgrades completely. This is a danger to the internet as a whole. To me it ultimately comes down to this: I can't force my older relatives to update their machines or even stop them from running ancient versions of Windows. On that front, Windows 10 made things better.

iajrz 8y ago
That's a nice take - it's still understandable that many of us would rather be in control of the software we're using, though, isn't it? It's - irksome. If one of my prod servers were forcefully updated - with no warning, therefore no chance to make backups - I'd be furious. If my main dev machine was bricked as a result of forceful updates, as I seem to recall it happened to some folk... It feels like they disregard users in that sense, and it's sad.
- the_hoser 8y ago
  I think this is a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" kind of situation. On the one hand, the user definitely thinks it's in their best interest to be in control of their software. On the other hand, history has shown that the average user doesn't make good decisions when it comes to said software. Microsoft will catch the blame for the insecure operating system, or they'll catch the blame for forcing users to update their software. I'm no Microsoft fan, but I really do believe they did the less-wrong thing in this case.
  - gnud 8y ago
    The forced upgrade would be less of a problem if Win10 didn't spy so much, or show ads in the start menu. It would still be a problem, but less so.
    - the_hoser 8y ago

ryanackley 8y ago

I'm not a Microsoft fan but I don't get two of your examples. Nokia was on the path to obsolescence before Microsoft purchased the failing company. Nokia lost more than $3 billion dollars in 2012. You don't spend billions of dollars to purchase a failing company and then intentionally fail some more. Skype works the same as it always has for me and I pay them nothing. Are you upset that Skype hasn't moved forward at all? That seems like a valid criticism but hardly "evil". The stuff they did in the 90's was true evil. They actively sabotaged competitive technology and companies. Making agreements in bad faith was part of their corporate culture. They considered open source a cancer they were trying to snuff out.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
dorkusmcgavin 8y ago
For Skype, the real complaints (maybe not here) are the structure and ways Skype works. Originally, Skype was a P2P communications platform, even for calls. After Microsoft acquired it, it was pushed into a centralized model. This goes against some fundamental concepts of how the internet is supposed to work, and the main benefits are mostly for Microsoft and not necessarily for users. Data acquisition of random call monitoring (for "quality"), government snooping (PRISM), and to integrate Skype into things like Xbox. We should be moving more in the direction of federated protocols, but instead we are moving towards more and more centralization in tech and as well as in our society. This also has security implications with data consolidation, data sharing, etc.
guitarbill 8y ago
Well, it isn't only Nokia, it's in the context of Microsoft's whole mobile strategy where they were more than happy to fuck over their own users. For example, the Windows Phone running version 7 could not be upgraded to 8. Or that it took them over two years to port Skype (which they owned) to Windows Phone. Meanwhile, it was available on iOS. This was all around 2010 and after. Not in the 90s. So Nokia is just shorthand for how clueless they were in this space.
wila 8y ago