5 ms·

Microsoft hasn't bowed to Trump – and the company is thriving

10 points by dxs 1y ago

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
rbanffy 1y ago
They just laid off 3% of their workforce.
- PaulHoule 1y ago
  That kind of company is always laying off 3% of the workforce. I decided that I never wanted to work at Intel in the early 00's when it became clear that they had a periodic ritual of laying off 10% of their engineers. I left academica because I didn't think I was good at musical chairs and no way would I want to work somewhere where I might get laid off just because they want to lay off 10% of the workers.
bobajeff 1y ago
Microsoft has been abusing their monopoly for a lot longer than Google. I wish they would put that target on their back. There are so many remedies I can think up straight away. Force them to sell off Windows. Force them to not have special pricing for specific OEMs under any special agreements or terms. Force them to unbundle Edge from windows. Force them to continually support and fully implement competing standards into their products. Edit: Force them to sell off Visual Studio, Direct X and .Net
- bediger4000 1y ago
  Yes. If Google is an illegal monopoly, Microsoft is too. I can only guess that since Microsoft rarely makes it into the "Big Tech" naughty list, they're doing an appropriate dollar amount of lobbying, where other companies didn't. Does Microsoft hold much cryptocurrency?
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- neonsunset 1y ago
  .NET is an open-source product. How would you sell it?
  - bobajeff 1y ago
    .NET Framework isn't and I assume they have some sort of ownership of the trademark which allows them to name their stuff .Net blank.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
  - rstuart4133 1y ago
    Chromium is an open source product too. As the sibling said, just as the .NET Microsoft serves up is open-source plus some hidden magic spice, Chrome is Chromium with a dash of proprietary sauce. I agree forcing Google to see Chromium makes about as much sense as force Microsoft to sell the open source part of .NET. I didn't understand it, still can't fathom the reasoning behind it, and I suspect I never will.
    - bobajeff 1y ago
      Much of the reasoning is to take away the tools these companies have abused to insulate themselves from competition and swallow up more of the market.
      - rstuart4133 1y ago
        > Much of the reasoning is to take away the tools I'm missing something. The tool they are taking away in this case is the web browser. They are a dime a dozen. To wit: I am (somewhat) plugged into Google's ecosystem, and I don't use Chrome. Removing Chrome will do nothing to loosen Google's grip on me. Yes, I'm sure Google used Chrome to shepherd a whole pile of features into the standard. Perhaps we would not have things like video, webrtc and drm if Google had not Microsoft owned the desktop. Microsoft tried valiantly to prevent it happening for years with IE6. But, it's more or less over now - modern browsers let web sites do most things once reserved for the desktop, and besides Microsoft has discovered it quite likes it's customers renting it's software running in their cloud instead of purchasing it outright. The horse has bolted, closing the gate now would be mostly a symbolic gesture. Lets say Google is forced to divest Chrome anyway. I'm sure they would like to maintain the few proprietary hooks they do need for password management and the like. One way would be to continue to fund Firefox, and add make their own proprietary extension available for it. If they do that, what's the point?

10 points by dxs 1y ago

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

rbanffy 1y ago

They just laid off 3% of their workforce.

PaulHoule 1y ago
That kind of company is always laying off 3% of the workforce. I decided that I never wanted to work at Intel in the early 00's when it became clear that they had a periodic ritual of laying off 10% of their engineers. I left academica because I didn't think I was good at musical chairs and no way would I want to work somewhere where I might get laid off just because they want to lay off 10% of the workers.

bobajeff 1y ago

Microsoft has been abusing their monopoly for a lot longer than Google. I wish they would put that target on their back. There are so many remedies I can think up straight away. Force them to sell off Windows. Force them to not have special pricing for specific OEMs under any special agreements or terms. Force them to unbundle Edge from windows. Force them to continually support and fully implement competing standards into their products. Edit: Force them to sell off Visual Studio, Direct X and .Net

bediger4000 1y ago
Yes. If Google is an illegal monopoly, Microsoft is too. I can only guess that since Microsoft rarely makes it into the "Big Tech" naughty list, they're doing an appropriate dollar amount of lobbying, where other companies didn't. Does Microsoft hold much cryptocurrency?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
neonsunset 1y ago
.NET is an open-source product. How would you sell it?
- bobajeff 1y ago
  .NET Framework isn't and I assume they have some sort of ownership of the trademark which allows them to name their stuff .Net blank.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- rstuart4133 1y ago
  Chromium is an open source product too. As the sibling said, just as the .NET Microsoft serves up is open-source plus some hidden magic spice, Chrome is Chromium with a dash of proprietary sauce. I agree forcing Google to see Chromium makes about as much sense as force Microsoft to sell the open source part of .NET. I didn't understand it, still can't fathom the reasoning behind it, and I suspect I never will.
  - bobajeff 1y ago
    Much of the reasoning is to take away the tools these companies have abused to insulate themselves from competition and swallow up more of the market.
    - rstuart4133 1y ago
      > Much of the reasoning is to take away the tools I'm missing something. The tool they are taking away in this case is the web browser. They are a dime a dozen. To wit: I am (somewhat) plugged into Google's ecosystem, and I don't use Chrome. Removing Chrome will do nothing to loosen Google's grip on me. Yes, I'm sure Google used Chrome to shepherd a whole pile of features into the standard. Perhaps we would not have things like video, webrtc and drm if Google had not Microsoft owned the desktop. Microsoft tried valiantly to prevent it happening for years with IE6. But, it's more or less over now - modern browsers let web sites do most things once reserved for the desktop, and besides Microsoft has discovered it quite likes it's customers renting it's software running in their cloud instead of purchasing it outright. The horse has bolted, closing the gate now would be mostly a symbolic gesture. Lets say Google is forced to divest Chrome anyway. I'm sure they would like to maintain the few proprietary hooks they do need for password management and the like. One way would be to continue to fund Firefox, and add make their own proprietary extension available for it. If they do that, what's the point?