3 ms·
You can understand and even state that these changes are a consequence of a new CEO that has different ideas and behavior compared to previous CEOs. And you eve
by byte1918 12y ago
You can understand and even state that these changes are a consequence of a new CEO that has different ideas and behavior compared to previous CEOs. And you even "blame" by describing the previous CEO as a "madman" but still don't want to give Microsoft a chance because at one point in time some previous higher-up made a decision with which you did not agree. Makes PERFECT SENSE!
- jacquesm 12y agoYes, it makes perfect sense. Maybe not to you but it does to me. See, if in the future some other CEO sees an opportunity to screw over a competitor, to try to destroy a viable eco-system based on open source tech or to destroy a company just because they can they may remember the case of Microsoft, and maybe that will steer them in the right direction. I wish Microsoft the very best but I want no part of it and I'm totally free in making that decision based on their past behavior. Microsoft has had their chance with me, I probably developed as much or more code for the windows platform as I did for other platforms but right now I would consider myself pretty silly if I switched back to MS just because they may have changed their ways and deserve another chance. Those are not lightly made decisions, there is a huge amount of time and effort invested and I already switched once because of their behavior. That said there is enough going on in the present that makes me wonder just how much they have really changed, they're still dragging their heels post judgement in several court cases where they have been ordered to start cooperating and have pulled a substantial number of annoying tricks in the recent past. Never mind the 'microsoft tax' (which I paid on this machine even though it never ran MS software for even a single cycle) and so on. So yes, it makes perfect sense.