undefined | Better HN

0 pointsRajT883y ago0 comments

> Sorry, I just can't see the change Satya brought to the company.

I would say that if that is your perspective, then you probably didn't have a close up view of them and how they operated before and after. There's been a lot of spilled ink about it; I won't rehash it here.

> it feels like Microsoft is paying Canonical in order to get help for strangling Linux desktop inside the Windows ecosystem, finally extinguishing desktop Linux installs once and for all.

I expounded on this in another thread - Desktop Linux isn't likely to be something MSFT spends any amount of time concerning themselves with as competition. Realistically, it's not real competition and any harms done to it probably were borne out of callousness or ignorance rather than competitive spite. The competition is OSX and ChromeOS (which I would not consider 'Desktop Linux').

0 comments

bayindirh3y ago

> you probably didn't have a close up view of them and how they operated before and after.

I have witnessed "before" enough, so I distanced myself from them pretty sharply, and I didn't bother to check "after" that close. It's my fault, I accept it, but from this distance the end result doesn't show any meaningful differences. So, it's something to ponder if you ask me.

> Desktop Linux isn't likely to be something MSFT spends any amount of time concerning themselves with as competition.

It's may not be competition, but is a big hurdle against locking down PC ecosystem and converting them to appliances. If they can run all Linux apps under Windows, they can revoke all 3rd party signing keys, make Secure Boot mandatory and tell judges "See, it all works under Windows. We're no monopoly. We already ship the environment free with new PCs, anyway."

This stance against Microsoft is one of the rare firmly held strong opinions of mine. I certainly would prefer not hold this so firmly, but they made it impossible over the years.