I want to believe Microsoft has deeply changed internally. I've largely moved to Windows as a primary OS after nearly a decade of Linux only. I use Visual Studio Code for a lot of my programming. It's an OS I initially grew up with and learned C on, for better or worse. Azure even has some cool stuff going on.

And really, it definitely has changed in some fashions. Time will tell if their rancid business practices have changed, but so far it certainly feels like a different Microsoft.

But would I put them above Google or Samsung? Not really. Their consumer OS feels like it comes with malware built-in. You finish the install and Candy Crush Soda Saga is already installing. Then after you remove that crap, you notice that your start menu has advertisements for other apps in it. After turning that off you install another browser and discover that you have to get past a nag to switch your default from Edge, and if you're lucky sometimes it will even switch back when you're not looking. And don't run Wireshark lest you want to find out your computer is secretly a hub for Microsoft telemetry, sending signatures of apps you run for security purposes, hitting a server for keystrokes in your start menu search. Am I being watched right now?

Not that Google isn't also intrusive, but at least Google often tells you and offers you the chance to say no in exchange for some loss of functionality. With Windows, you get all of this crap even if you uncheck the boxes during setup. The only way around it is Server versions.

So I'd trust any ChromeOS box (including say, Samsung's) to work toward more of my interests than any inexpensive Windows box that might come with SSL root certificates and malware I never asked for. Sure, Microsoft doesn't pre-install superfish, but it amazes me how little they seem to care when others do it.

> The Microsoft of today

What about tomorrow? Their history needs to be remembered.

They play very nicely in areas where they're the underdog, but not when they're on top where lock-in is rife.

Make use of them, by all means.. but never depend on them - ever. Always have an exit strategy.

(same goes for most other companies, but Microsoft especially)

Are there any specific examples you could give about where they currently have a lot of lock-in? As far as I can tell, the worst they get is just as bad as any other company with a proprietary SaaS product.

Maybe Microsoft Office. I know there is LibreOffice and personally I use it (or LaTeX), but it seems to have a real stranglehold on a lot of people.

They collaborate because they have been forced to, not because they are collaborative. That's a significant difference.

Once they regain their market share you will see their true character.

This is exactly my worry.

I'm not sure you can't actually see their true character though. Look at the deafening silence and corporate opinion on telemetry criticism and the acres of forum posts dedicated to making windows stop calling home. That's an abusive relationship if there ever was one.

From a MS blog post that was on the front page today[0]:

> .NET Core is optimized for building highly scalable web applications, running on Windows, macOS or Linux. If you’re building Windows desktop applications, then the .NET Framework is the best choice for you.

Nope, it's still the same MS as always.

[0]: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/dotnet/2017/11/16/announcin...

I don't get it. What's wrong with that statement?

They might have given up on the server market, but they're still pushing hard to keep the Windows monopoly on the desktop for as long as possible.