"People" in this instance is a handful of special edge cases compared to the majority of computer users, even if we're only looking at people that build their own computer, or hell, even just looking at only linux users. Dual booting is a minority. Yes, you CAN do it. Linux has made it easy. Great! But not many DO.

Nobody gives hell to every other OS manufacturer that will clobber our current bootloader configs. That means more than OSX, btw.

FreeBSD used to (maybe still does?) clobber the boot loader too. Do they also have mustachios that they evilly twirl?

On the other hand, Windows runs on 85 - 90 percent of desktop machines, whereas FreeBSD's market share on the desktop is probably below 1%. (This is not a judgement on FreeBSD's quality as a desktop system, I have used it myself for about two years and was very happy with it. But compared to Windows, its market share on the desktop is tiny.)

For better or worse, there is a difference between a system used by a tiny minority of people (again: on the desktop) and a system that practically has a monopoly on the (corporate) desktop and that is developed and sold by a company that has a history of anti-competitive behavior. (And to be fair, I get the impression that things have begun to change at Microsoft since Nadella became CEO. But that still does not erase history.)

That other hand and its callbacks to anti-competitive behavior and whispers of monopolies don't have much bearing on anything unless you are prepared to substantiate exactly how this behavior impacts the market share of other competitors. (I wish you luck on that very, very long row to hoe.)

Meanwhile, even that "good behaving" Linux distro will happily remove Windows's boot record in favor of GRUB's, rendering the system reliant on a component that breaks if you want to remove Linux (and most people are way more likely to want to remove Linux than to remove Windows!). Hardly neighborly behavior in and of itself. And yet, I'm still not seeing a reason to cast aspersions on GRUB or Linux distros, nor am I seeing those twirly mustachios on their faces.

No OS gives much of a damn about anything else running on the computer. Claims to the contrary are literally farcical and the pseudo-damages it could theoretically cause to the easily bruised are silly.

> No OS gives much of a damn about anything else running on the computer.

Most Linux distros (the ones I have used, at least) will detect an existing Windows installation and put a corresponding entry into GRUB's menu. Linux has been able to access data on Windows partitions for many, many years.

I agree that the boot loader issue probably has at most negligible impact on the adoption of Linux (or any other OS for that matter). I am just saying that in light of Microsoft's history one may feel inclined to judge them differently.

Personal attacks, which this crosses the line into, are not allowed on HN.

This might be an Appeal to Dehumanization (I just created a new fallacy), but I consider about 75% of the people on HN to be legitimate people. the remaining reek of sockpuppetry. I felt the grandparent was a sockpuppet, and am treating the account as a dataset for future encounters.

I should be more mindful of the fact that there's (potentially) a human being behind the account I'm treating like an astroturfer. I can see why you considered this a personal attack.

If you want to name a new fallacy, name the bias where people are more likely to think someone is astroturfing or a shill when they disagree with them. That's a common one, and it's definitely against the rules on HN to go there without evidence. An opposing opinion is not evidence.

https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix=true&page=0&dateR...

one would assume the Hasty Generalization[1] fallacy would suffice.

When, do you think, does a rhetorical device fall into the realm of propagandizing?

1. http://www.logicalfallacies.info/presumption/hasty-generalis...

Propaganda? You're confusing a love for the English language and a little command of rhetoric with something vastly different, chief.

Hell, I don't even use Windows as a primary platform; I'm typing this from a Mac while I'm (quite literally) waiting to meet a guy to sell my Surface Pro 3 that I never use. I'm just not impressed by rules-for-thee-but-not-for-me silliness and knee-jerk, irrational fear. I don't trust Microsoft any more than I trust any company. But I don't rely on the fears of fifteen years ago to evaluate the current state of the world, either.

I think you and I have a vastly different definition of propaganda. I considered your post to be information or ideas methodically spread to promote or injure a cause, movement, nation, etc. In this case, the cause and movement would be "microsoft is still evil, do not forget." do you disagree that your post fits the definition under these constraints?

As you used it twice in this thread, I'm going to add "mustache twirl" (or variation) do my dictionary of rhetorical devices used to make an attack seem like less of an attack. it's very effective at disarming someone that calls it out. Thanks for this.