this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2024
646 points (95.6% liked)
Technology
59429 readers
3058 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's not a failure to consider the alternatives that slows adoption, it is the very real material problems with those alternatives.
It's not fair that a multinational corporation gets to wield virtually limitless power to starve the alternatives of oxygen and create as much friction as possible in the process of switching, but it is a very real problem, and blaming the users won't solve anything.
Can you provide a citation for your claims about the process of switching?
The comment I replied to didn't source their claim that it's the users' fault, but I notice you didn't ask them to source their claims.
Perhaps you could explain why your skepticism is so selective before I answer your question.
And perhaps you could be more specific about what claim you want "sourced". That the switch to linux has a lot of friction? That it's difficult? That Microsoft has deliberately cultivated that friction? That users aren't simply failing to consider it? That blaming the users isn't the solution?
What exactly do you want me to source?
I didn't notice or care about their comment, it was meaningless bs. Yours is something for which it's feasible to provide evidence, it's a novel claim, and I saw nothing to back it up other than hostility.
Everyone mostly agrees on this, not interesting. Also you didn't even directly claim this in your post, so obviously I wasn't asking about this. You're just seemingly using this hostile badgering approach to stifle the conversation.
This is the interesting claim. After all Linux deliberately shoots its legs off every few years, why does Microsoft need to help?
Honestly your original question was so vague and terse I almost didn't reply, it just seemed so pointless. If you don't want hostility, don't come with an attitude like that. Do the work to make yourself understood the first time. And don't just demand citations - you're not my professor. Just ask questions like a normal fucking person. Ask for information.
Given you're asking for evidence of Microsoft's sabotaging of open source projects including Linux, I'm going to have to assume you're coming from a place of actual curiosity and not bad faith. It's actually one of the most famous examples of anticompetitive behaviour in history. Start there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish