[michielr]

> There has been nothing but words up to this point.

I get your point, but come on, there have been a lot of 'actions' over the last couple of years. This only detracts from your argument. We've had .NET Core, visual studio code, the improvements on Git, WSL and more.

[craftyguy]

None of those are meaningful contributions to existing platforms/projects that MS does not own outright. They're throwing code of the wall. MS's contributions to git are very light.

Edit: clarify my point.

[RussianCow]

> But one could argue that those contributions to git are just to further MS's interests.

Of course they are! Everything a corporation does is to further its own interests. Most (large) companies don't contribute to open source out of the goodness of their hearts.

[wpietri]

> Everything a corporation does is to further its own interests.

This is a common misconception. It's a close cousin of the "increase shareholder value" school of thought, which has widely (and correctly) been called "the world's dumbest idea": https://www.google.com/search?q=the+world's+dumbest+idea

We exist in a complex society. It is everybody's job to maintain that society. We do that through things like voting and paying taxes. But also through making the world better directly. Companies that only do things they perceive to be in their immediate pecuniary interest are essentially parasitic. And, at least sometimes, are rightly shunned for their self-centered behavior.

If Microsoft is trying to grow up and be a good corporate citizen, I applaud them. But if they are, as you say, only putting on a mask of neighborliness because that's their plan of the moment to fill their pockets, then there's no reason to welcome or trust them.

[maemilius]

If Microsoft's goal is to become a better corporate citizen, isn't anything they do to progress on that goal "furthering their own interests"?

[wpietri]

There's a difference between putting on a mask of citizenship because it's profitable and actually caring about the world beyond the size of one's wallet. Confusing the two requires confusing the meaning of "their own interests".

[RussianCow]

Is there, though? Maybe I'm just cynical, but I don't believe in the idea of "trusting" a corporation at all, because their default behavior (especially for larger companies) is to only care about the bottom line. Once you accept that everything a company does is for their own benefit (even if their actions happen to also benefit others) and learn to take each action at face value, I find it easier to evaluate the consequences of those actions.

The idea of trusting an entity that is designed to try to take your money seems silly and futile to me.

[prewett]

But someone that acts only in their own interests is not trustable. You give trust to people as they demonstrate that they are concerned about your interests. Thus far, I've seen zero evidence that Microsoft has genuine concern for anyone else's interests. And they've had a history of acting against other's interest in a stifling and illegal way. I don't trust them.

[scarface74]

As opposed to every other large company? All companies are only concerned with their own interests.

[sha90]

MS is contributing to Electron. They benefit, but so does the wider community. This is generally how OSS works.

[BigChiefSmokem]

https://www.linuxfoundation.org/membership/members/

Microsoft has had a vested interest in Git and Open-Source for a while now.

[craftyguy]

The Linux Foundation is a joke organization that companies use to push their own agendas in the name of "linux and open source", when in reality very few members actually care about it. It's a 'badge of honor', nothing more.

If you need further proof, observe that Oracle is on the list. There's not a company on Earth more hostile to FLOSS than Oracle. And yet there they are, and a "platinum" member at that. Lol.

[JohnL4]

Is the Open Invention Network still a thing? MS still hasn't joined, and is still using patents as a weapon, apparently.

https://www.infoworld.com/article/3042699/open-source-tools/...

[BigChiefSmokem]

Doesn't the OIN secretly sell some of its patents to non-members and non-licensees? Sounds very strategic for the companies involved and this can lead to some serious consequences for any company who is targeted by an OIN patent.

[throwaway2048]

any sources for this?

[throwaway2048]

The linux foundation is nothing better than a PR front, they have members like Allwinner and VMWare who straight up refuse to stop violating the GPL license of the linux kernel, and face no consequences.

[michielr]

Which, one could say, is what open source is all about right? Get people or organisations motivated to improve upon code and share this with the rest of the community so they can reap the rewards as well. No one expects anyone to do stuff only for the greater good. The greater good is the best result of open source, but it isn't the motivation.