4 ms·

I'm having a tough time drawing a conclusion from this article. In my experience with commercial/open source projects the only reason they are open source is be

by tra3 7y ago

I'm having a tough time drawing a conclusion from this article. In my experience with commercial/open source projects the only reason they are open source is because of some sort of market advantage. Is the author suggesting that Microsoft doing all this OSS work out of the goodness of their collective heart? Corporations are about making money, while that goal and OSS happen to align we'll get open source from Microsoft. The second it stops being strategically relevant: bye-bye.

de_watcher 7y ago
Money... Then the conclusion is that you have to be careful when using the word "love" there.
ppseafield 7y ago
I think the article takes issue with "Microsoft loves Linux" as a blanket term, where it's more like "Microsoft loves† Linux‡" († supports in only a very specific way because of losing to Linux on the server side.) (‡ Linux as used only for servers. Linux as a desktop OS can still get bent, and we're trying to get devs to abandon it when working on code that deploys to Linux servers.)