3 ms·

Seen from a certain angle, the real question is: why don’t more companies do this? This isn’t charity, this is enlightened self interest paired with understandi

by moomin 2y ago

Seen from a certain angle, the real question is: why don’t more companies do this? This isn’t charity, this is enlightened self interest paired with understanding that pissing off your free supplier is a bad idea.

high_na_euv 2y ago
>why don’t more companies do this? What exactly? Whole big tech contributes to linux. MSFT is probably biggest of them
- josefx 2y ago
  Wasn't Microsofts biggest Linux contribution the code to make it run on Microsofts Hyper-V ? From what I understand their only other major contribution is the Rust project that ran head long into a wall.
  - BSDobelix 2y ago
    Jup it's crazy that people still think Microsoft (the "We Love Linux initiative") did anything big apart from let Linux run good on their Hypervisor, Oracle for example did 100x more then MS (yes oracle...).
OliveMate 2y ago
I'd say half of it comes down to Valve having the staff with the key knowledge and skills to provide support, and the other half comes down to not being public. I'm sure many devs and publishers are filled with people who know that acts like this can garner trust and future support for their company, but will have efforts cut short because someone above complained that the line didn't immediately go up.
- StableAlkyne 2y ago
  > the other half comes down to not being public In every service or product I've bought, going public (and prep to go public) has preceeded a decline in quality. The day Valve goes public will be the day its downward trend starts, because its customers become the shareholders.
pie_flavor 2y ago
Because it's money, and not doing that barely impacts them. Valve is always more prosocial than other companies because they have an infinite money spigot as long as everyone likes them, so prosociality is their business model.
johnnyanmac 2y ago
> why don’t more companies do this? 1. Support is expensive for the layman/small business, but peanuts for large companies compared to hiring their own experts. And faster to ramp up/down. The strong arming stuff like Adobe can do to companies is mitigated when you can hire PR/Dev relations dedicated to strong arming their support companies. The peanuts add up, but it's not like most companies these days are thinking long term. 2. Liability is almost as important as support. Being able to point fingers to someone else during disaster (e.g. Crowdstrike) can also save a lot of money for companies taht have lawsuits thrown at them 24/7. A small linux team won't want to claim liability. it's pretty much the main "downside" of most FOSS licenses.

by moomin 2y ago

high_na_euv 2y ago

>why don’t more companies do this? What exactly? Whole big tech contributes to linux. MSFT is probably biggest of them

josefx 2y ago
Wasn't Microsofts biggest Linux contribution the code to make it run on Microsofts Hyper-V ? From what I understand their only other major contribution is the Rust project that ran head long into a wall.
- BSDobelix 2y ago
  Jup it's crazy that people still think Microsoft (the "We Love Linux initiative") did anything big apart from let Linux run good on their Hypervisor, Oracle for example did 100x more then MS (yes oracle...).

OliveMate 2y ago

I'd say half of it comes down to Valve having the staff with the key knowledge and skills to provide support, and the other half comes down to not being public. I'm sure many devs and publishers are filled with people who know that acts like this can garner trust and future support for their company, but will have efforts cut short because someone above complained that the line didn't immediately go up.

StableAlkyne 2y ago
> the other half comes down to not being public In every service or product I've bought, going public (and prep to go public) has preceeded a decline in quality. The day Valve goes public will be the day its downward trend starts, because its customers become the shareholders.

pie_flavor 2y ago

Because it's money, and not doing that barely impacts them. Valve is always more prosocial than other companies because they have an infinite money spigot as long as everyone likes them, so prosociality is their business model.

johnnyanmac 2y ago

> why don’t more companies do this? 1. Support is expensive for the layman/small business, but peanuts for large companies compared to hiring their own experts. And faster to ramp up/down. The strong arming stuff like Adobe can do to companies is mitigated when you can hire PR/Dev relations dedicated to strong arming their support companies. The peanuts add up, but it's not like most companies these days are thinking long term. 2. Liability is almost as important as support. Being able to point fingers to someone else during disaster (e.g. Crowdstrike) can also save a lot of money for companies taht have lawsuits thrown at them 24/7. A small linux team won't want to claim liability. it's pretty much the main "downside" of most FOSS licenses.