Embrace, extend, extinguish

Microsoft 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.

1. They own LinkedIn, and I could just stop this list here.
2. They're the founding fathers of Embrace, Extend and Extinguish.
3. They are the vanguard of videogame studio consolidation, after buying Activision and Bethesda.
4. AI
5. Everything they do is soggy bread: you can eat it, it's probably mostly healthy, I think, but if a product is not the minimum viable product then it will be; take the Halo franchise as a reference for blandness, Windows for end user tolerance - both are controversial yet functional and popular software that people complain (and do nothing) about. Halo took quite a hit in popularity, but still...
6. Remember when a software company got in trouble for monopolistic practices? That was a thing that happened at some point, and it was Microsoft. Not that it will ever happen again, nowadays all the cool kids have some slice of the tech landscape on a chokehold.

pretty 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.

Microsoft has been building the O365 platform to lock out competitors and locking users into an ecosystem that is difficult to leave. They systematically eliminate competition and have pushed to create laws that make competition harder. In embrace extend extinguish, they are in phase 3, which is a massive red flag. They also started putting out spyware and malware into their software and have proven they can't maintain security; making them a bad actor in a position of power. Scale is debatable, but Microsoft is undeniably evil in 2024.

my 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.

How bad is Microsoft?

Yes

Windows is the worst thing that ever happened to computer science.

And I don't exaclly mean the product itself, but the mindset and habits that came with it.

Microsoft 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.

Why did you link to the Microsoft website?

They coined the term Embrace, Extend, Extinguish and they haven't stopped enforcing it. I haz not much faith on WSL and similar.

How bad is Microsoft?

Bad enough to be stay away from

Maybe I'm going crazy but I feel like I've been seeing this post or an identical one for many days, maybe even a week, yet the age is still one day.

Still, fuck MS and all.

Microsoft is about as bad as any other proprietary software company. They do some good things for the open source economy, but they also mistreat their users.

I think it's a mistake to look at the free software movement as being a reaction against Microsoft or Google. It's against the proprietary software world in general.

First they tried to destroy FOSS, then they realized that they can make money and gain control using open source software, so now they pretend to support it. Microsoft is a monopolistic piece of garbage that I'm staying away from at all costs.

1. 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.

As a shareholder (which I'm not), it's absolutely amazing.

As a human being though... it's simple to look at the history of the company, from its inception based on nepotism and locking-down was hitherto the common good, to going from one place of monopoly (OS, app, cloud) to another (extending to whatever is trendy at the moment e.g XR with HoloLens, AI with OpenAI, etc).

It's IMHO one of the very worst thing that could have happened to humanity in terms of cognitive empowerment. Apple is not far behind but in terms of locking up an entire ecosystem but Microsoft, sadly, is doing it better.

To clarify what I mean is that Microsoft is the business embodiment of learned helplessness. Most people would shrug at the quality of software they provide, the price, etc ONLY because they are convinced, wrongfully so, that they are is no legitimate alternative. If users were actually able to chose, not being coerced into but properly chose, by experiencing alternatives, the World would be totally different. Instead of having computer users who feel an adversarial relationship to their devices, we would have a much stronger relation of "this is MY device" the same way a lot (not all) of people have a repair toolbox at home. They know they can try to fix something in THEIR home, even improve it. Most people understand it won't be easy, they might mess it up, but it's possible to try. Not in software, and that's entirely Microsoft "success". Maybe in an alternative reality others, like Apple, would have made that happen to, but in our reality I blame Microsoft, Bill Gates upbringing from his legal mindset father and well connected mother.

We could have a world were users own their devices, have a challenging yet empowering relationship to technology, starting with software, and instead we have exploitative learning helplnessness. So yes, Microsoft is that bad.

I think overall they are not better or worse than other tech giants. They try to be the platform for blank and thus to push competitors out of the marked, or lock it down so they can't enter. They try to extract as much money from their customers as they can, even if it makes the user experience worse. They push the boundaries of what the can legally do. They charge you, but you don't own anything.

What really grinds my gears is how they try to force stuff on me that I don't fucking want. I feel like they are completely different in that regard than for example Google. I use Google Maps because I want to. I don't use Chrome because I don't want to. It's that easy. They don't ask me to reconsider, they don't make it super complicated to switch, nothing. I can disable any Google App and forget about it.

To stick with the Google comparison, I also feel like Google informs me better and gives me more control regarding my data. This feels much more hidden on convoluted in MS products in general. For example I had no idea Office is basically spyware before reading about it elsewhere. In Google-land, they seem much more upfront about what they use and what I can opt out from (or in to).

I don't think about Microsoft at all mostly. I supported their stuff professionally in the past and friends/family but otherwise total avoidance. They own some big game studios so I probably use some of their products like Minecraft but I haven't used their operating systems or applications for decades and I dislike and distrust cloud services and theirs is no exception. All big companies tend to be the same. Try not to depend on any of them.

No offence, but have you been living under a Microsoft shaped rock for the past 30 years?

Is this the circlejerk community of lemmy?

Undoubtedly

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.

Michaelsoft is literally the devil

Microsoft has basically taken almost all businesses in the world hostage.
Once your staff is trained on MS products and your own stuff is fully connected to Azure, you're trapped and they can adjust prices to just below what you can bear.

Microsoft doesn't need a monopoly in the dying consumer desktop market anymore. That's why they're the top contributor to the Linux kernel, integrated a Linux layer into their OS, offer to save documents in an open format in Office, and host articles on how to install Linux in their documentation.

The year of the Linux desktop has finally come. Everyone who doesn't still run Windows 7, now has a Unix system installed on their PCs (and all other devices). It's just one that's distributed by Google, Microsoft or Apple.

Buggy and laggy. I work with it and its a daily pain for my soul and mental health.

This thread teaches me that generally, most Linux people are looking at windows. Meanwhile Microsoft only thinks Windows is 16% of its business.

Basically, it seems, most Linux users do not think hard about Microsoft.

I like Micsrosofts office suite, but I hate virtually everything else. I got tired of their recent decisions and bought an Apple laptop, partly because I'm getting into iOS development and wanted that experience. But my other computer is dual booted with Fedora and Windows for when I absolutely need Windows, I'll swap over, bit rarely do I outside of some gaming.

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.

Very bad

The death of Windows means more people will come to Linux

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.

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'.

I consider their new push for webapps in stead of traditional client as bad practice, its buggier and runs like absolute shit

Microsoft is evil, but are they more or less evil than Google?

I 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.

One word:

Recall.

One pet peeve of mine is how in Windows 10 switching between virtual desktops was flawless, and somehow in Windows 11 they fucked it up. At first it had no animation when switching, the taskbar kind of glitches. Now it has an animation but it's kind of delayed and the taskbar still kind of glitches, it seems to reload or something. Kinda crazy honestly

How bad are we that M$ still has 75% market share on operation systems and office suites?

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.

I feel like the authors of this site may be biased, though.

Worse than theyve been as is most every other massive conglomerate still in business since inception. As the adage goes, power corrupts. Absolutely immutable if the rest of the corporate world is any example

I thought we were well past this topic. I guess everything old is new again. In fact, I'll dust off a classic:

"Bugs fly through open Windows."

What does "bad" means to you exactly? They are the hypocrites just like any big corporation, value only money, they 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.

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 out a world without it.

My point could be: you can't compare the actual reality to a hypothetical reality because the hypothetical reality isn't real. So how can you know it exactly?

I was curious what the Linux people think about Microsoft

Basically two teams (applied to anyone that are "speaking", e.g writing propaganda blogs, comments, etc; they don't necessary need to have all of this properties, and they may have both teams' properties):

Pro microsoft, pro systemd, pro bsod, pro administrator, pro "security" (privsec.dev pro microsoft edge), pro ms office, pro wine, anti apple/mac, anti (a)gpl, pro .net, pro powershell, .....

anti microsoft, anti windows culture, anti systemd, anti msedge, anti powershell & cmd, anti conio.h, anti bsd/mit/isc, anti company sponsorship ....

Team 3: BSD: receive donation from every entities and work on their clean operating system and software they give everyone for free without restriction; FreeBSD has been looked down by the anti-company anti-apple anti-permissive-licenses clowns

Expressed by Theo de Raadt (OpenBSD): "Linux people do what they do because they hate Microsoft. We do what we do because we love Unix."

Join team 3!

And, you cannot make the world better by just destroy A company, Microsoft. You must destroy all of them, or don't destroy any, because it can only make the existing company to compete more fierce, and because OpenBSD needs donation from Google, Microsoft, and Meta to keep working on OpenSSH and other great software those companies need! They don't need clowns to look up nor look down them, like when those clown looks down FreeBSD because they received something from Apple that I cannot figure out what.