5 ms·
With there being so much talk how Microsoft is reformed/reforming, I do not really see the change at all. Microsoft always was about developers and getting the
by marenkay 8y ago
With there being so much talk how Microsoft is reformed/reforming, I do not really see the change at all.
Microsoft always was about developers and getting them into their ecosystem and I do not think this is evil. It's business.
People act like the Open Source strategy is so much different from the Ballmer days but is it really? From a business perspective they tried to throw rocks into the paths of Open Source as a thing, and it did not work. It just alienated more developers. Logical conclusion is to blend in. And so they did.
Apart from that, with Open Source being kind of a de facto default for the past decade, it just becomes so much harder to find engineers who would work at a company not respecting the ideas behind Open Source development.
Microsoft is now sitting at the focal point for the majority of Open Source efforts. And it has a kill switch in its' hands.
The reformed Microsoft is the old Microsoft. It just learned a few tricks from the Open Source community.
- oblio 8y agoI feel we're focusing way too much on this good vs evil debate. Life doesn't work like that, there's always shades of grey. Everyone has their interests. So, based on this underlying assumption, what does Microsoft by gaining by using this kill switch? Heck, what does it even gain by appearing to threaten people with this kill switch? It's worse that no benefit, it's actively harmful for them. So, why are we discussing about them this way? They're not irrational.
- marenkay 8y agoI should probably added a few irony tags here, the "kill switch" picture was just meant to exaggerate what seems to be the primary concern going around. So to add two things to clarify: personally I do not see any of this as good/evil. It's business. But one catch: business is comprised of human beings, thus it often _is_ irrational :-)