> ...and they are backers of The Linux Foundation, the Apache Software Foundation, the Open Source Initiative and many similar efforts.
Looks like disclosure to me
I guess so, but it downplays the amount of cash they're giving to the organization that employs the author of this post.
Enough to pay for less than 5 engineers a year? Okay.
Yeah, Microsoft can find $500,000 in the couch cushions. It's not even a rounding error for them. It doesn't mean it's not a good thing they're doing it, but it's not like that's a huge contribution.
It's not huge to Microsoft, sure, but it's signficant enough to the Linux Foundation that it effects the independence of any LF reaction to Microsoft (especially since their stance toward Platinum members affects the attractiveness of the membership in general, not just for the member they respond to.)
I believe it is quite clear to many of us familiar with the space that Microsoft is not some small-time backer of the Linux Foundation and other, related organizations. I certainly did not feel the least bit of an attempt to downplay MS' financial contribution in light of the subject of the conversation.
Despite what I said in the other comment, I have to admit that it's not just a sponsor but also one of the biggest contributors of commits.
Is that not tax deductible ?
They get a write off and your support as well as the marketing bits.
How much is the write off on such donations? Surely can't be 100%.
My understanding is that the GP was commenting about the author's biases not those of Microsoft. Those are two entirely different perspectives. It doesn't apply here that Microsoft gets a deduction.