MoorshouIs Microsoft a bad company?
originalucifermy favorite bit was how no one at microsoft actually understood their own licensing pricing. for decades, you could call microsoft for pricing and get different answer from people in cubicles next to each other or even from your own rep.
it was as if they were making it up as needed.
kittenzrulz123I personally have no problem with people using Windows but I don’t want it shoved down my throat. When people first boot their computer they should have the option to choose what OS to install (Windows, various Linux distros, and FreeBSD) and that choice should always be available in the bios.
AbidanYreEmbrace, extend, extinguish
Came here to say this. They wrote the playbook that has spelled the end or at least shitification of so many standards, open-source or otherwise(but usually still free-to-use or at least cheap).
They also wrote the book on user-hostile everything
And set the bar super low for other tech companies
IIRC It’s on their Wikipedia
mudleUndoubtedly
It used to be pretty bad, back when it was using all the dirty tricks it could invent to build its monopoly. By now though it's just obsolete.
No|BugSure enough, it's up there with Facebook and Saudi Aramco.
Obsolete? Hardly. The Surface, GamePass, Xbox, GitHub, Skype and just general market dominance says otherwise. They only lost their effective monopoly due to antitrust lawsuits.
Currently, there’s lots of better options out there, true, but it’s far from obsolete.
Is Skype still a thing? I thought it died soon after MS bought it!
It’s Teams, now.
Ugh, Teams. I can’t believe Skype and MSN died for this!
It’s a phone service and business communications. I have to use it for work
Huh, didn’t realise they were still bothering to sell it
thingsiplayYes. During the entire history of MSDOS, Windows and Internet Explorer, there are so many things you can pick why Microsoft is bad. Now they even integrate Recall into Windows. I want to say that I always disconnected Xbox from Microsoft; and I’m not entirely sure why.
The question of this post is a bit misleading, because it implies that someone could answer with “no”. Better question (in my opinion) is “How bad is Microsoft?”.
Impossible to know it, there isn’t any other corporation who fight with M$ it is a perfect monopoly so it’s impossible to figure a world without it.
I don’t think the world is black or white. Of course Microsoft can make bad choices and prioritize profit, but Microsoft isn’t a person or and entity. MS is an enterprise driven by people that work there.
Linux community or any other community can also make bad choices, afterall it’s also people-driven and people are flawed.
I don’t excuse MS for really bad choices, but also don’t blame it. I just think that’s better to see the world complex as it is, not by judging stuff as ‘bad’ or ‘good’.
You can’t compare a general community to a company. Linux community isn’t a single community. It’s like talking about the gaming community and putting everyone into one soup. Linux community isn’t a single entity. However Microsoft is a company and is an entity. Microsoft is an organization, which is one definition of entity. With a clear leadership, goal and driven by making money.
You can say if a company is bad or good, just like you can say if Google and Facebook is good or bad. But you cannot do this with broad collection of different communites, who act independently from each other, such as the “Linux community”. Each part of the Linux community has its own goals and does not even align with the other. Therefore it is not a single organization and not an entity. That’s why you cannot take this as an example as a counter argument to criticize/judge Microsoft.
You totally missed the point I was trying to say. And I’m not going to explain because of laziness.
I did not miss the point and corrected your statement not being applicable, because the comparison is totally wrong. And I explained why. I you claim me being missing the point and not trying to explain, then I have to assume you have no explanation.
Assume whatever you want. I don’t care
Just like Microsoft.
That’s because…
I’M A MICROSOFT EMPLOYEE IN DISGUISE!!!
Lemmygradwontallowme [he/him, comrade/them]My good sir… if the system is rotten… then you could generally say the damn enterprise is…
While I can see the merit of your sentiment here, and would generally agree the world exists on a spectrum and not some binary scale of yes or no, black or white. Like others have said, with mottos like “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish” how can one ignore the bad that Microsoft brings to the table.
I would argue that all companies are bad. But Microsoft specifically abuses their de facto monopoly to engage in gross invasion of their users’ privacy, and continues to try to wrest their users’ control of their system from them by altering system settings after updates, and making some settings nearly impossible to change. And that’s to say nothing of MS’s attempts to turn their operating system into and advertising platform.
macnielpretty much.
If you need a point for developers: all public code repositories hosted on GitHub are harvested, at least in 2021, and used to train copilot regardless of their license. Furthermore, GitHub is OWNED by Microsoft now.
Don’t forget they own npm too
What does “bad” means for you exactly? They are the hypocrites just like any big corporation, value only money, the reinvent wheels all the time, but their products pretty good despite being non-free, and making programs is much easier for Windows then GNU/Linux.
It would be even better if they didn’t force you to use only their products.
You value simplicity or free of choice and privacy? The “bad” definition depends on it.
I do lean to having privacy and freedom to do whatever with my tools as “good” things
Then it’s very unusual question that GNU/Linux could ask. If I may ask, what is your story with Microsoft? What was the last drop for you?
My last straw was the privacy and lack of control.
I didn’t like software being released by Microsoft telling me my choices were bad or unoptimal, I like my software, I made my choices from listening to others and forming my own opinion. I had a shift in thinking recently, I wanted to start selecting my software based on my values rather than just choosing whatever works.
hauiIt really depends on your perspective if windows is „easier“ to produce for. They are fully and redundantly vertically integrated which means they have the means to produce IDEs and even create programming languages.
But it is hugely easier to create a small app on linux imo. The simplicity of linux and the modularity of the different desktop environments is pretty great.
Is it tech illiterate friendly like windows? No! It would be great if everyone would be able to use linux now but we‘re gonna have to be patient.
I wish everyone use GNU/Linux too. Mostly agree with you. Except of calling Linux simple. I wish it was simple… (Unless you mean simplicity of use?)
In this particular case I meant that linux is the same in all regards: open source. You can look everything up if you have the time. This makes it possible to change everything and anything you need. Even through different DEs you still have the same structure.
Now if you go try that with windows, you‘re properly hosed. Different package manager? No! Different desktop environment? No!
Simple might not have been the best choice of words though. Modularity might be better.
Rustmilian1. Monopolistic business practices to crush competition (Netscape, Java, web browsers, etc.).
- Microsoft was found guilty of maintaining an illegal monopoly and engaging in anti-competitive tactics against competitors like Netscape Navigator and Java in the 1990s antitrust case.
2. Illegal bundling of Internet Explorer with Windows to eliminate browser rivals.
- The U.S. government accused Microsoft of illegally bundling Internet Explorer with Windows to crush competition from other web browsers. Microsoft was found guilty of this tying arrangement.
3. Keeping useful Windows APIs secret from third-party developers to disadvantage competitors.
- Microsoft allegedly kept useful Windows APIs secret from third-party developers to give an advantage to their own applications, though this was not a central part of the antitrust case.
4. Embracing proprietary software and vendor lock-in tactics to prevent users from switching.
- Microsoft has been criticized for embracing proprietary software and vendor lock-in tactics that make it difficult for users to switch to alternatives, such as their failed attempts to establish OOXML as an open standard for Office documents.
5. “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish” strategy against open source software.
- Microsoft has been accused of using the “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish” strategy against open source software to undermine adoption of open standards. This is also shown in the leaked Halloween documents.
6. Privacy violations through excessive data collection, user tracking, and sharing data with third parties.
- Microsoft has faced scrutiny over privacy issues, such as the NSA surveillance scandal and their handling of user data with Windows 10.
7. Complicity in enabling government surveillance and spying on user data (PRISM scandal).
- The PRISM surveillance scandal revealed Microsoft’s complicity in enabling government spying on user data.
8. Deliberately making hardware/software incompatible with open source alternatives.
- Microsoft has been accused of deliberately making hardware and software incompatible with open source alternatives through restrictive licensing requirements.
9. Anti-competitive acquisitions to eliminate rivals or control key technologies (GitHub, LinkedIn, etc.).
- Microsoft has acquired many companies over the years, sometimes in an effort to eliminate competition or gain control over key technologies and platforms.
10. Unethical contracts providing military technology like HoloLens for warfare applications.
- Microsoft’s $480 million contract to provide HoloLens augmented reality tech for the military drew protests from employees and criticism over aiding warfare.
11. Failing to address workplace issues like sexual harassment at acquired companies.
- Microsoft’s failed acquisition of gaming company Activision Blizzard raised concerns about ignoring workplace issues like sexual harassment at the acquired company.
12. Forced automatic Windows updates that override user control and cause system issues.
- Microsoft has faced backlash for forcing automatic updates on Windows users, including major updates that have caused issues like deleted files and crashed systems. Users have little control over when updates install.
13. Maintaining monopolistic dominance in productivity software and operating systems.
- Microsoft has maintained its dominance in areas like productivity software (Office) and operating systems (Windows), making it difficult for competitors to gain market share. This monopolistic position allows them to exert control over the industry.
14. Vague and toothless AI ethics principles while pursuing lucrative military AI contracts.
- Microsoft’s AI ethics principles have been criticized as vague and toothless in light of their pursuit of lucrative military AI contracts.
15. Continued excessive privacy violations and treating users as products with Windows.
- Windows 10 has been criticized for excessive data collection and lack of user privacy controls, essentially treating users as products to be monetized.
16. Restrictive proprietary licensing that stifles open source adoption.
- Microsoft’s proprietary software licensing makes it difficult for open source alternatives to be adopted widely, as they have a history of undermining open source software and interoperability with Windows.
This isn’t even anywhere near everything.
Microsoft is really good at getting rich selling terrible software that performs worse than even freeware in the same category. They have full market dominance, and therefore produce nothing but overpriced junk.
SonotsugipaaMicrosoft is definitely the corpoest of them all.
Probably not the worst corpo, likely even, but out of the corpos, they are the most corpo corpo of any corpo.
Ok but look on the bright side of things! you get great futures with this big tech concentration and control of the market. For instance, who else doesn’t want a operating system hotkey to Linkedin, baked into their settings? How did I use a computer without that before?!
delirious_owlWorse than Apple?
I’m not sure, at least the unrepairable mess made by Microsoft is software rather than hardware - you can reinstall a janky OS but you can’t unexplode a phone that disassembled itself when you sneezed in its general direction.
There’s no fine line between the two companies.
Apple is from the walled garden of Eden.
Fortunately I have a ladder
Apple is highly restrictive on their OS and over priced. They are extremely pro consumerism with heavy marketing and engineered obsolescence to ensure you are always pressured to buy their new tech, and they are historically very strongly anti-right-to-repair.
Microsoft is bad. But at least they are primarily a software monopoly.
Yes. Microsoft is the king of “good enough” software. DOS was good enough (and had a free C compiler!). Windows gets the job done 95% of the time when it’s not freezing up or needing rebooting. Office is okay - and nothing else is 100% compatible so you get a bonus of vendor lock-in. New features are few and far between, as are bug fixes for non-critical issues.
BwahFoxVery bad
The death of Windows means more people will come to Linux
Also mean more commercial distros. Less donations to BSDs projects.
No offence, but have you been living under a Microsoft shaped rock for the past 30 years?
My lifespan is shorter than 30 years so yes.
Possibly linuxAre you a Eggplant?
Haha, yes I’m an eggplant, thank you BTW, I enjoy seeing you posting! I think you were a reason I stick around lemmy.
Consider this; you were taught Microsoft <product> in school as it’s used in work environments, Microsoft <product> is used in work environments as it’s taught in schools or the person making the decision was only taught one product.
Why do you think Microsoft is giving free upgrades from windows 10 to 11, same thing from XP upwards. It’s vendor lock in, and that’s bad for many reasons
IMO the title of “worst computer tech company” is essentially a tie between MS and Google right now, with the two constantly one-upping the other back and forth on stupid ideas and corporate practices.
I would argue that it’s either 4-6 way tie, or Meta is worst, but MS is terrible.
InternetCitizen2Don’t forget Oracle.
There is a lot out there on why from a lot of sources, so definitely not hard to do research on this. Definitely research the history of this company regarding anti-competition, Bill Gate’s letter to hobbyists regarding intellectual property and markets (which touches on the whole proprietary vs FOSS suff). You can also just use their products for a while and see for yourself, note what you like and what you don’t like (for me the latter is more likely), and make your own judgement.