Big Corps aren’t the issue (or well they are but not because they’re big corps), they only become an issue when a regular tool in their playbook is Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. See Facebook, XMPP and the effect that hostile takeover had on their recent plans to create a Fediverse platform. I agree that the Microsoft hate is overblown and unhealthy but to pretend that Microsoft engaging more in Linux is something to be enjoyed without worry is equally a bad idea. There is no guarantee they’ll try to shoehorn their own bad ideas into Linux and quite frankly I think Linux is too big for them to manage that but it is a concern nonetheless.
Still at least with Linux there are plenty of other giants who have a vested interest in making sure the status quo is upheld with no single company having a monopolistic influence on the development so I don’t think there’s any reason to worry about the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish playbook working here at all.
I’m holding out hope (i.e. pure fantasy) that the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish playbook backfires so that Microsoft becomes just another corporation supporting what is basically another Linux distribution, called Windows, and contributing upstream. I suppose it would have to be more like what Apple did with BSD. I feel like they’d still be very able to profit this way and everyone would play together a little better. If there was enough basic and built-in on-by-default interoperability between Windows and things like ssh, NFS, filesystems, etc., many people may never bother uninstalling windows from pre-built devices like laptops that come bundled with it now.
I obviously wasn’t speaking in generalities about big corporation, so put away the straw-man argument. This specific corporation, Microsoft, has a long history of using “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish” to stifle competition. Denying or trivializing that concern is at best naive, but more likely just a little bad faith rhetorical trolling.
It’s a problem if big corp doesn’t support linux. It’s a problem if big corp supports linux.
=> Big corps are the problem
Big Corps aren’t the issue (or well they are but not because they’re big corps), they only become an issue when a regular tool in their playbook is Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. See Facebook, XMPP and the effect that hostile takeover had on their recent plans to create a Fediverse platform. I agree that the Microsoft hate is overblown and unhealthy but to pretend that Microsoft engaging more in Linux is something to be enjoyed without worry is equally a bad idea. There is no guarantee they’ll try to shoehorn their own bad ideas into Linux and quite frankly I think Linux is too big for them to manage that but it is a concern nonetheless.
Still at least with Linux there are plenty of other giants who have a vested interest in making sure the status quo is upheld with no single company having a monopolistic influence on the development so I don’t think there’s any reason to worry about the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish playbook working here at all.
I’m holding out hope (i.e. pure fantasy) that the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish playbook backfires so that Microsoft becomes just another corporation supporting what is basically another Linux distribution, called Windows, and contributing upstream. I suppose it would have to be more like what Apple did with BSD. I feel like they’d still be very able to profit this way and everyone would play together a little better. If there was enough basic and built-in on-by-default interoperability between Windows and things like ssh, NFS, filesystems, etc., many people may never bother uninstalling windows from pre-built devices like laptops that come bundled with it now.
I obviously wasn’t speaking in generalities about big corporation, so put away the straw-man argument. This specific corporation, Microsoft, has a long history of using “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish” to stifle competition. Denying or trivializing that concern is at best naive, but more likely just a little bad faith rhetorical trolling.