| > This seems to me as some kind of defeat and that makes me sad. It's sad for me to look how great companies grew old Your sadness is misplaced. Presumably you like resilience, yes? How does one achieve resiliency? At least in part via redundancy. A homogeneous environment, which an environment which relies on one vendor is, is non-redundant. All you've got then is a single point of lock-in, that can never be a good idea. You can be held hostage to the whims of the vendor. As soon as Linux became a viable choice to Windows and old Unix people left in their droves, and for this very reason. To my mind, Microsoft is now acting like a more mature rational hungry company. I thought I'd never see the day. And frankly, if they hadn't started changing they'd be on the road to complete irrelevance. > This way they could lose SQL Server customer and Windows customer at the same time False. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14845783 Staying with SQL Server because Linux version was provided. > I believe this wouldn't have happened 10 years ago, and moreover, it would have sounded just unbelievable. Agreed. But that was not a good thing, that was very bad. For Microsoft, and their customers. Now that may have been something to lament. |