3 ms·
> It's intentional sabotage, more than probably covertly initiated and maintained by Microsoft Do you have any evidence for this? I would like to think that HN
by pcwalton 4y ago
> It's intentional sabotage, more than probably covertly initiated and maintained by Microsoft
Do you have any evidence for this? I would like to think that HN is above making these kinds of totally unfounded accusations.
(I'm not affiliated with any party here and don't care about the conflict at all.)
- pessimizer 4y agoNo evidence, but that doesn't mean that they're unfounded, that means that they're unproven. There's only one party that profits from the confusion, and it's a party that spent a fortune on bribes (or "grants" or whatever) during the OOXML debacle.
- outside1234 4y agoSort of like making an unfounded accusation against Microsoft that can't be disproven. C'mon, we are all better than that here.
- coliveira 4y agoThe commenter is right to the point. Look at the sponsors of Apache foundation, and you'll see that Google and Microsoft appear as some of the largest contributers. Of course they don't want to antagonize these companies. The best way to look at Apache and simular foundations is as infrastructure maintained by big companies to redirect open source effort to their goals. They use third parties to do this because the companies themselves enjoy very little trust from the open source community.
- sgift 4y agoSo, no evidence. Just FUD. Got it.
- _benedict 4y agoThe Apache Foundation has next to zero input into how any of the projects are run, so even if this were true it would be irrelevant. How exactly do you imagine this influence working? It would have to be quite overt to have any effect on so many projects that are self organising.
- ipaddr 4y agoThey have 100% control over what projects they office.