Uhhh, they've changed a lot. They actively support competing platforms, releasing products for Android, iOS, Mac OS and Linux. They support Ubuntu on Windows in terminal, they regularly contribute to open source from React Native to Electron. Edge is a huge improvement over IE and it fully embraces web standards. Microsoft has even merged their web docs with Mozilla. They support .NET on all platforms.
If they honestly released a top notch version of Office for Linux would you, in 2018 where most have switched to Google Docs or other web based office tools actually use it?
I very much doubt it. I feel you're just reeling these things off as some burden of work you want them to toil away at as a debt you expect them to pay to the Linux community.
99% of the people I know use MS Office. Maybe 20% use google Docs but not as their main office suite.
If they did release Office for Linux, I'd use it for work, since everyone uses it there.
> I feel you're just reeling these things off as some burden of work you want them to toil away at as a debt you expect them to pay to the Linux community.
I don't think they owe anyone anything. I'm just saying if they claim to love open source or Linux, then they need to prove it.
So the online version of Office 365 and the desktop version and the mobile apps will share a lot of the same code. This would also make it far easier to deliver desktop apps for Linux should they decide it's worth it.
They've also worked together with Linux projects to make the Windows Subsystem for Linux a thing (so you can now actually "install Ubuntu" from the Windows app store).
The vendor lock-in company you're thinking of is now called Apple, not Microsoft.
Exactly. Everything that "new Microsoft" does right is targeted squarely at developers. I'll judge Microsoft by how it treats the rest of the world: dark patterns to accelerate Windows 10 adoption, using consumers as beta testers, protecting their Office monopoly above all else.
It's mainly only developers that use Linux. Using consumers as beta testers? Who doesn't do that or something to that effect these days? "Move fast and break things" ship fast, get feedback, and iterate, etc. These are all mantras of agile, startup culture. Meanwhile, I'm not sure I see this with their latest products at all.
I think there's a difference between shipping untested changes on an ad-backed cat picture web app, and selling a $99+ operating system that is essentially a beta version:
I thought that this article was overly pessimistic until Microsoft's rings of "insiders" didn't catch the fact that the Windows 1803 update broke machines with pretty common Intel and Toshiba SSDs.
All of this wouldn't bother me at all if it weren't for the MS Office monopoly that forced everyone from schoolchildren to public servants to deal with this crap. I want nothing to do with keeping this business running.
That depends on what you mean by "what Apple is doing".
I'm not a fan of Apple either, but at least they are not hypocrites.
If MS stopped pretending that they <3 Linux. (see my other comments)
And if they stopped pretending that they are this new friendly open company. Forcing upgrades to win10 and forced telemetry that is a pain in the ass to turn of permanently, is not at all open or user friendly. What a privacy nightmare.
If they did just that, then at least I wouldn't hate them for being such hypocritical assholes. They'd just be a company whose products I don't like.
For example: a (para)-VM that's capable of running off Linux filesystem or subvolume (so you don't need to allocate separate partition or disk image for that), capable of running all the win32 binaries, and seamlessly integrating into Linux desktop and infrastructure (i.e. non AD-Kerberos would be great).
I was originally going to say that they should open source those. But then I changed my mind to just releasing it on multiple platforms as a start. And so Windows doesn't make sense there. I should have proof read that better. Thanks for pointing it out.
They have spend decades indoctrinating their users, that command line is baaad... and now it is a good thing, that they support linux binaries in windows command line?
I will believe they changed, when they release their crown jewels (especially Office) for Linux as a first-class release (i.e. not ala IE for Solaris or WMP for HPUX).
They have changed for worst. When I upgraded my PC recently my retail Windows deactivated and it took me few days of talking to "support" to re-activate it. They were treating me like a potential thief and I had to even show them invoices that I have indeed purchased new motherboard.
Another one - I purchased Visual Studio 2015 just before they released 2017. They didn't want to give me a refund nor upgrade deal.
Oh and you cannot turn off spying in their Windows 10.
they have definitely changed, they have re-aligned themselves with what matter today. There earnings has just surpassed $100 billions which is the direct effect of their re prioritizing the product lines and philosophy. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/19/microsoft...
Because they keep churning out garbage. And the only "good" stuff they do make, they don't open source, or even release it on multiple platforms.
Not to mention the fact that they are extremely user hostile. Putting ads in a paid for OS? And mining private data. If their OS was free I'd at least say they had an excuse to do that.
> Because they keep churning out garbage. And the only "good" stuff they do make, they don't open source, or even release it on multiple platforms.
.NET Core runs on Mac, Windows and Linux and is BSD licensed, and totally not all garbage (though I'm guessing you will disagree with me here with no backing facts because what defines garbage is mostly opinionated views). VS Code is the same scenario. Wow it astounds me the lack of understanding coming from you.
Yes I will concede that .net is not garbage. I have written code with it before and it's pretty average. It doesn't really give me anything that I can't do with Java or C++ (or other programming languages)
So what I'm saying is that it doesn't really bring anything worthwhile to the table.
VS Code. Yeah, I am not at all interested in an electron based code editor. And yet again, there is nothing new or novel here. There are dozens of other code editors that are free, cross platform, and very powerful.
If they open sourced (or even released on multiple platforms) Visual Studio, then I'd take notice. Same for Office.
> Wow it astounds me the lack of understanding coming from you.
And I'm likewise astounded at all the people falling for microsoft's brainwashing PR bullshit.
> VS Code. Yeah, I am not at all interested in an electron based code editor. And yet again, there is nothing new or novel here. There are dozens of other code editors that are free, cross platform, and very powerful.
Again with the lack of understanding, Microsoft produced a new standard for editors called Language Server Protocol[0] that once implemented in an editor and for a language can be used across editors and IDEs. They are doing more contributions through VS Code than you realize.
As for Open Sourcing VS I would love that but VS Code is snappy and awesome as it is so it doesn't bother me. VS Code with the right plugins (same can be said of Emacs, Vi etc) is amazing. For Dlang / Rust the best support I've seen for either language is for VS Code which is the youngest mainstream editor out there atm. Don't simply dismiss VS Code it's fame / usage speaks for it's own quality as a tool for editors. You even see in Sublime Text and Atom discussions that a number of people have just simply switched to VS Code.
They don't claim they love open source, or that they love Linux.
But microsoft does. So by not open sourcing or releasing their main products on Linux, they are being hypocritical assholes who just want to look good.
Why can't people be excited by something from Microsoft?