I’d appreciate not being called lazy for mentioning a lack of investment on Microsoft’s side to secure their paid and fairly lucrative service that they bought a popular code hosting platform to integrate with.
How did we go in 20 years from holding these companies to account when they'd misbehave to acting as if they are poor damsels in distress whenever someone points out a flaw?
They hired a ton of people on very very good salaries
The opposite, to be lazy and to continue giving them money whilst being unhappy with what you get in return, would actually be more like defending the companies.
The opposite we see here: to not criticize them; to blame Microsoft's failure on the critics; and even to discourage any such criticism, are actually more like defending large companies.
This especially includes governments and other institutional buyers.
Their size or past misbehaviors shouldn't be relevant to this discussion. Bringing those up feels a bit like an ad hominem. Whether criticism is valid should depend entirely on how GitHub Actions actually works and how it compares to similar services.
If the past misbehaviours are exactly the same shape, there's not all that much point re-hashing the same discussion with the nouns renamed.
You better thank god for MS for being lazy and incompetent, the last thing we want for big tech is being innovative and have a stronger monopoly
Honestly I think the problem is more a rosy view of the past versus any actual change in behavior. There have always been defenders of such companies.
Here we are talking about one of the worlds most valuable companies that gets all sorts of perks, benefits and preferential treatment from various entities and governments on the globe and somehow we have to be grateful when they deliver garbage while milking the business they bought.
And besides that, a lot of people on here do pay for Github in the first place.