I see many arguments incoming defending Microsoft and getting more or less visibility depending on the audience at the time. Something along the lines of: "Let

I see many arguments incoming defending Microsoft and getting more or less visibility depending on the audience at the time. Something along the lines of: "Let's compare it to some competitor who also does it wrong. See they are not doing any better but they are not criticized as much. How can you complain about this company then? You can't. We must be glad for what they give us. See how much good they do and how little you have achieved compared to an international giant. If you really want to do better go make your own store. You can't? Obviously you can't. Then you can't criticize." But the bottom line is that all these companies are ruled by money first and foremost. Sure, there are differences in detail and the approach they take but in the end the logic of money trumps all morals. For the "new" Microsoft this means that they have changed their approach because of money. Whatever good they do for us is because they think it will make them money in the long run. I think of it as a long running PR action and a medium change of company culture. If it suits them, they will change it back over night. WE must keep them under pressure to do the right thing by not letting us be held hostage by monopolies and always having a way out. So support your open source software because in the long run it will dominate in most places.