• Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    4 months ago

    Yes.

    Entire companies and (worse) government depending on a single vendor knows for it’s 30 year long history of attitudes like “we before our customers” and “well tell you anything to sell you, but well barely do the basics on our products” and"we’ll make sure we’re compatible with nothing, going as far as sabotage, so you can’t escape our greedy claws" is a very bad idea ™. Forcing customers and citizens to use that crap is even worse.

    With Linux ( and the open source world) you have an open System that has been independently verified by millions, you have actually inter system compatibility oozing out of the wazoo. You have vendors selling software that you can actually rely on.

    • Random Dent@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      Even with Linux though, so much of it relies on Github (think Nix Flakes, the AUR, and just general random apps that live there etc.) which is owned by MS. Not that they would necessarily just nuke Github one day (because that would be an insane thing to do) but just the general idea that MS is in a position to disrupt so much of the Linux ecosystem if they really wanted to makes me uneasy.

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Fully agree there, Linux should not be hosted on a service manageby Microsoft, if even just for the principle of it.