[caramelcustard]

I don't think that it's solely the fault of anti-GPL people. GPL proclaims freedom but then demands you to limit your freedom when it comes to anything of your own that just happens to include GPL licensed elements. At that point, proprietary solutions whose providers couldn't care less as long as you pay your fee don't seem that bad in comparison to, say, a competitor who's going to exploit the GPL freedoms to gain an advantage. I mean, considering that the topic is about Microsoft (in a way), don't forget about the existence of the "Source available" license, though IMO the best license is always going to be the one that fits the product rather than ideology (and GPL puts the product in the background).