4 ms·

Suppose we move 20 years forward. Are we going to see this type of comment regardless of what the company would be at that time? "No way, man! I bet you're youn

Suppose we move 20 years forward. Are we going to see this type of comment regardless of what the company would be at that time? "No way, man! I bet you're younger than 50, if you... " Do you really think that ghosts from the past need to haunt people's minds for that long regardless of how the state of the world has changed? I perceive none of MS and Google as being protective of their users or respectful of said users privacy. Nonetheless, when we speak of events that have anything to do with morals, I guess we have to take into consideration the time that has passed since those events have happened, since both the morals and the scene could have changed dramatically.

rbanffy 14y ago
The UEFI "secure boot" thing tells me they haven't changed one bit. They are still the same company. Trust them at your own risk. You have been warned.
troels 14y ago
I think your reasoning is flawed, to be honest. If a person (and let's pretend companies are people, just for now) does something amoral, it would take a lot of deliberate effort to rebuild trust in said person. Especially so if the deeds were done in a situation where the person was in power and that power has since dwindled. Of course, companies aren't people, but even then - The actual people who lead the company are, and those are the same people now as then. For comparison, I think mr. Gates has actually done his part to "repay" his debt to the world, but that's him personally - not something that reflects back on Microsoft. In any case, the topic wasn't about which is fair or not, but rather about what the public image of Google vs. Microsoft is and I strongly disagree with your sentiment that Google generally appear more corrupt than Microsoft does. At least if we're talking the tech-savvy part of this worlds population.

4 ms·

Suppose we move 20 years forward. Are we going to see this type of comment regardless of what the company would be at that time? "No way, man! I bet you're youn

by vitalique 14y ago

rbanffy 14y ago
The UEFI "secure boot" thing tells me they haven't changed one bit. They are still the same company. Trust them at your own risk. You have been warned.
troels 14y ago
I think your reasoning is flawed, to be honest. If a person (and let's pretend companies are people, just for now) does something amoral, it would take a lot of deliberate effort to rebuild trust in said person. Especially so if the deeds were done in a situation where the person was in power and that power has since dwindled. Of course, companies aren't people, but even then - The actual people who lead the company are, and those are the same people now as then. For comparison, I think mr. Gates has actually done his part to "repay" his debt to the world, but that's him personally - not something that reflects back on Microsoft. In any case, the topic wasn't about which is fair or not, but rather about what the public image of Google vs. Microsoft is and I strongly disagree with your sentiment that Google generally appear more corrupt than Microsoft does. At least if we're talking the tech-savvy part of this worlds population.