I think anyone who's paid attention to Microsoft over the past 20 years could tell you that they're out of the game these days. Hell, if you still don't believe me, go look at their revenue share. Windows, Xbox, Office... all of that plays second-fiddle to Azure now. Without Linux, Microsoft couldn't deliver the same first-rate cloud experience as AWS. Without Linux, WSL doesn't exist on Windows. Microsoft has realized that their role in this play is to sell thick-clients and let servers do what servers do best, there's pretty much nothing I've seen in the past 10 years that would suggest ongoing hostility towards Linux users from Microsoft. Maybe that dotnet hotloading fiasco was the worst thing? As someone who wouldn't touch dotnet anyways, I don't really care how good it's Linux tooling is.
Microsoft is trying to kill Linux desktop and lock it to server rooms, because the server side is a lost cause, but the desktop side is not. They just want Windows based games to work on other systems, so they can market Windows as compatible with that "other" games, and enable Linux under Windows so they can say "Hey, you don't need to install that, it works under Windows, too". Even more so, they can completely lock PC platform starting Win11 and onward and tell antitrust regulators that all the software already works under Windows, anyway.
They wanted to inject Mono/C# into GNOME and Linux so they can make the whole desktop dependent on themselves, but that backfired spectacularly. So this is their new tactic.
Microsoft has a DNA, and this DNA is in action with full force. They didn't change, and they won't change, ever.
Oh, maybe they can extort some money by suing DXVK in the future, who knows.
We're seeing all EEE cycle, again.
Also, if you had the same point of view, you could have written the same thing.
BTW, I was already using Linux by 2002. I have pretty much first hand experience of what Microsoft did until today.
Nadella is just a person. It can't steer a behemoth of a corporation going on the same path for at least 30 years, with a DNA planted by its founder and built upon "acquiring" other people's source code and being "inspired" by others' ideas.
On the other hand, I just see Nadella as a softer talking version of Ballmer. He's just acting soft, but threading the same path with same insistence and rigor of Ballmer.
I don't trust Microsoft as a corporation, period. Their current ambitions and actions only reinforce the image I have in my mind which is formed by experience. This is a strong opinion, firmly held. I don't swing it around to hit people with it, but kindly show them whenever need arises.
Lastly, Why is it so frowned upon to not like a company in a non-violent way and voice one's opinion?
Nono it's fine I guess - it's just that a companys culture forms from top down. Granted, if Nadella is just Ballmer in Nadella clohing, then this doesnt hold up, but that would also validate the argument that Ballmer was just a Gates in Ballmer clothing.
The board chooses the CEO, the CEO is the top authority in the company. He sets the tone. There is no "Windows team" anymore, were going full in on Azure and Linux. Its simply a different time.
I see Gates as the reference point and the pioneer: Halloween documents and all that. Strangle market.
Ballmer: Double down on Windows, developers, EEE, tell them as overtly as possible. Strangle people, developers and software.
Nadella: Be soft, be friendly, pin down developer ecosystem, take away what makes Linux magical and embed into Windows ecosystem, make Linux irrelevant so it's not a threat anymore.
They're trying to do the same things in a different manner.
Microsoft is Microsoft. They make great hardware. I pay for Office license, and buy upgrades for family computers, yet I won't lend them my sins for a second.
I'm not one of these guys who hates Microsoft, because it's cool. I was using their keyboards and mice for a long time, and actively recommended them (still do, actually), but when it comes to playing nice with open source, haha, that's not existent. Let's not kid ourselves.
Microsoft used up all its credit by abusing its power, tech, and goodwill of its users over the years.
They also did it again with VSCode by close-sourcing more parts of it.
There's no reason to think that Microsoft did it unintentionally.
The burden of proof is theirs.