If you don’t like Microsoft’s contributions to Linux, you can fork it and remove them. If you don’t like Microsoft’s contributions to Windows, you have to use something else.
It’s not just Microsoft tho. Redhat, oracle, facebook, Google, intel, AMD, they all contribute to linux. Removing their contribution would effectively make the kernel unusable
Everyone is getting free stuff; that’s the point. If you want companies to not use free stuff to make money then either linux is worse, or companies need to po away.
So what’s the problem with that? We get contributions for free to make newer hardware working, they improve already existing stuff, they solve bugs and everyone take advantage from that.
Hardware manufactures (Intel, AMD, etc) SHOULD be contributing to Linux. How could they EEE if they aren’t directly competing? The better compatibility they have with Linux, the more server CPUs they can sell. That’s their motivation, and it’s aligned with the OSS community.
Microsoft also uses Linux. They have both Windows Subsystem for Linux, and they also use it in house I’m certain. Linux is technically competition for MS, but not really. They aren’t trying to sell Windows to the people choosing Linux. To assume malice when there’s perfectly reasonable reasons for them to be contributing is likely wrong.
If you don’t like Microsoft’s contributions to Linux, you can fork it and remove them. If you don’t like Microsoft’s contributions to Windows, you have to use something else.
It’s not just Microsoft tho. Redhat, oracle, facebook, Google, intel, AMD, they all contribute to linux. Removing their contribution would effectively make the kernel unusable
Isn’t taking corporate money and extracting it into a public good a positive?
You have it backwards. The corporations are extracting free public contributions.
Everyone is getting free stuff; that’s the point. If you want companies to not use free stuff to make money then either linux is worse, or companies need to po away.
You got it backwards, corporations make most of the contributions to the linux kernel. How is that extracting free public contributions?
So what’s the problem with that? We get contributions for free to make newer hardware working, they improve already existing stuff, they solve bugs and everyone take advantage from that.
Hardware manufactures (Intel, AMD, etc) SHOULD be contributing to Linux. How could they EEE if they aren’t directly competing? The better compatibility they have with Linux, the more server CPUs they can sell. That’s their motivation, and it’s aligned with the OSS community.
Microsoft also uses Linux. They have both Windows Subsystem for Linux, and they also use it in house I’m certain. Linux is technically competition for MS, but not really. They aren’t trying to sell Windows to the people choosing Linux. To assume malice when there’s perfectly reasonable reasons for them to be contributing is likely wrong.
Also a good point, but Microsoft has a history of EEE so it’s also fair to be sceptical of them.