> Look how now Microsoft has become such a champion for open-source.
to be fair, they didn't just doctor history, they actually changed their ways.
to be fair, they didn't just doctor history, they actually changed their ways.
Everything else they've done is pretty much PR management.
Here's a list of their open source projects.
https://opensource.microsoft.com/?sort=Stars&keyword=&tag=
(Microsoft may be the world's largest open source contributor
https://www.techrepublic.com/article/microsoft-may-be-the-wo...)
(Microsoft becomes 5th largest contributor to linux core https://www.ukfast.co.uk/microsoft-news/impressive-microsoft...)
That MS has made some projects OSS is just recognition they needed to up their game or be left behind.
It in no way means they're suddenly "good guys" (etc).
When their actions are those of "good guys", then perhaps they could be start to be viewed as such.
>Am I out of the loop, what have Microsoft done to support open-source?
That's what I responded to.
Not saying that they didn't change their ways, but they are a long way from proving that this is not another EEE cycle. Not to even mention "breaking even" on the damage they did directly (and deliberately) to open source effort.
[1] - https://www.linuxfoundation.org/2017-linux-kernel-report-lan...
Microsoft could open source Windows and people will still mention EEE. Impossible right? But, open sourcing dot net was inconceivable just a few years ago.
You're talking about EEE. In fact, the organization that's actively performing the EEE strategy is Google. It's quite easy to spot if one isn't blinded by fandom.
E.g. webkit -> blink, rss, bundling of apps on android prevent manufacturers from using forked android, chrome OS has only one browser - MS didn't even do this to get in trouble, AMP project, and then experimenting with removing urls from the search page.
So whatever floats your boat.