The sad thing is that Microsoft really haven't improved. The competition got more successful and took the ethics down much lower than the bar set by Microsoft.

The sad thing is that Microsoft really haven't improved. The competition got more successful and took the ethics down much lower than the bar set by Microsoft. They only look good because their power diminished and others are more effective at being utterly horrible. Apple are but one example. Can you imagine if Microsoft had tried to take 30% of your sales revenue for selling software that runs on windows? Apple did it, got away with it and took that bar down lower. Google followed and got right in there. Privacy concerns? Race to the bottom with facebrick, goog and everyone else seeing who can fk everyone over with a bait and switch strategy, deeper, faster and more profoundly. Microsoft haven't really competed there but I'm pretty sure it's not because they've taken a moral position anymore than IBM did about competitive practises in the 90s. Microsoft probably haven't got a lot of my data under false pretenses and without my explicit consent but it's unlikely because they chose that - they just don't have much I'd want to use as a lever to rip me off. At least yet. IBM look ok now, right? Whodathunk they literally provided the infrastructure for Nazi death camps? [1] Did their investors bless that moral position in those days too? There go Amazon claiming the right to sell facial recognition services to assist despots destroying the lives of humans. How much money is enough Bezos? Does your toy rocket make you feel better about it? He probably wasn't so bad at one time. It can happen to any of us even without masses of money to lubricate the process. Nonbinding resolution saying "Don't sell this stuff to evil bastards." Non-binding. Can't even have that as an "ideal" to aspire to. Get rid of that, could be money in it. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust