4 ms·

EDIT: oops, this wasn't from MS.

• powersnail 6y ago
  That's grossly unfair to the author of this project. This is not from Microsoft, but an individual developer.
  • slondr 6y ago
    The "individual developer" you're talking about is a former Microsoft employee
    • JoBrad 6y ago
      So Microsoft’s plan to extend Linux includes getting former employees to do it?
      • eneville 6y ago
        Wouldn't anyone with a pension or shares in a company want it to succeed?
        • zeusk 6y ago
          but that's the employees sole intent, and not the "firm". People really get riled up with some brands, but I think brands are really just people who operate the brand collectively, often with an emphasis on the leadership that gets to guide the sail. Gates and Ballmer are past.
          • eneville 6y ago
            How is Gates past? Doesn't he still own the majority share but just someone else is the face of the company? I would assume, as a majority share holder, your interests and ethics would remain the same.
• setr 6y ago
  AFAICT this isn’t by Microsoft, and anyways by this definition it would mean that Microsoft cannot do anything without being declared EEE revival except strictly implementing the baseline standard. Extending standards is normal and expected. It’s the extinguishing part that we get in trouble, but a natural risk of any large player “contributing” to OS (their weight is what opens the possibility; but their weight is also what you want to enable larger/comprehensive OS codebases). That is, you want Microsoft contributing to Linux. The thing to avoid is only Microsoft contributing to Linux.