• mondoman712@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • Ineocla@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      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

      • hglman@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        1 year ago

        Isn’t taking corporate money and extracting it into a public good a positive?

          • hglman@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            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.

      • MazonnaCara89@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        So what’s the problem with that? We get contribution for free to make newer hardware working, they improve already existing stuff, they solve bugs and everyone take advantage from that.

      • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.