[gregd]

Oh for crying out loud, I’m so over this holier than thou attitude.

Every company and every vendor has strengths and weaknesses. Laughing in someone’s face for choosing to use one platform is ridiculous at best.

My entire almost 30 year career has been Microsoft centered, except for brief stints with Novell, mainframes, and OS/2.

And based on my anecdotal evidence over many companies and many years, Microsoft has been pretty solid.

[Jgrubb]

I assume the poster to whom you're responding just hasn't been in the industry long enough to understand that the entire point of gigantic platforms like Microsoft or AWS is specifically to create ecosystems of vendors that provide service around that platform.

[toomuchtodo]

You can tell by who is fighting the current. Some get paid in ideology, some in fiat. Which are they here for? That's the question. I'm just here to get paid, and enjoy working with others desiring the same outcome (strong opinions weakly held while bank acct goes brrr). We can chat war stories at the hotel bar with a comfortably large investment account from the work.

[tpush]

I guess that's why technology abuses the user so much these days.

[toomuchtodo]

Unethical implementations are distinct from agnostic technology implementation choices. I don’t care about the underlying tech (Windows, Linux, Mainframe), but I’m certainly never working at Meta, for example. New FedNow instant payments runs on a mainframe. New hotness? No! Built to run for decades? Yes.

[karim]

All vendors have weaknesses, but few have Microsoft's cavalier attitude towards security. Case in point: https://www.wiz.io/blog/storm-0558-compromised-microsoft-key...

If you bragged to me about being locked into Azure I would be very puzzled.

[dcow]

Meh. That whole issue is way overblown by the twitter researcher types trying to build buzz and make a name. It's a serious issue don't get me wrong but security incidents are a question of when not if and the dialog surrounding the issue doesn't come across as charitably capturing the scope and impact. Microsoft's response, which has been to handle the issue responsibly is far from the "radio silence coverup" and "the attackers are still in the network" and "you can't trust anything Microsoft signs anymore" reality you'd be inclined to believe if you only read the hype angle and believe the alarmist comments from other "any chance to bash on M$ is a heyday" types.

I hadn't seen the article you linked though and will say it seems to be in good taste.

[karim]

They were able to spoof tokens for a long time, access mailboxes, etc.

If this isn't enough for you, there's also ChaosDB, the cross-account vulnerability Palo Alto found (https://unit42.paloaltonetworks.com/azure-container-instance...), among many others.

This isn't an isolated instance, that's a pattern.

[arrakeenrevived]

>Every company and every vendor has strengths and weaknesses.

Yes, every company and every vendor does have strengths and weaknesses. That's why it's foolish to lock yourself in to only one vendor.

If you locked yourself in to AWS, for example, you'd benefit from some great AWS services, but be stuck using the awfulness that is Workmail/Workdocs. Or you could lock yourself into MS and get Outlook/Office, but then be stuck using subpar offerings like Azure Functions or be a victim to their lackadaisical attitude towards security. Why would you ever choose to do either of those? Instead, you can choose both Microsoft for Outlook/Office, and AWS for other offerings that they are stronger at. Now you benefit from the strengths of both, while avoiding their weaknesses.

If you _can't_ do that, there might be good reasons and that's fine. But to _intentionally_ not do that, and especially to _brag_ about not doing that is laughable, no "holier than thou" attitude required.

[jdmg94]

more power to you if you made a career on MS technologies, for a long time they were the big dog on the corporate world but to be fair there are better options there and actually bragging about vendor lock-in is ridiculous, if you're full in and it works for you good! But its not something to brag about, specially since MS refuses to fix their certificates after they got hacked by China

[gregd]

@danseop08 Stuck? What a weird and interesting thing to say since I deliberately chose and applied for jobs I was not only good at, but had the most experience in. And to then add in that I haven't seen anything other than Microsoft to boot?

Don't you think that over a 30 year tech career that I've touched and used many different products and technologies?

[dcow]

meta note: if you can't see the reply link, click on the comment timestamp "X minutes ago" and then you should see the reply box.

[danseop08]

Very bad rebuttal. You effectively just demonstrated you got stuck with MS for 30 years. You have not seen any others other than MS. You likely downplay the bad and overtly having good image of MS. My experience with multiple cloud systems CANNOT conclude Azure in the top 5. At best maybe 6th with occasionally hitting 5th or 4th depending on some specific tech metrics.

[pjmlp]

AWS, Azure, GCP followed by everyone else.