/tech/ - Technology★

list

>anti-competitive

being too good for others to compete

>anti-consumer

being kind enough to give out windows 10 for free

>and just straight up illegal or otherwise evil shit this company had done over the decades?

tax evasion and triggering freetards famalama

I used to work for the most infamous of James Plamondon's students (the guy who created Microsofts's 'evil strategy' group), from the stories he used to tell the stuff that the DoJ actually got them for is small time compared to everything else they did.

The light bulb conspiracy is pretty well documented

Manufacturer made a agreement to fix price and quality

Then we have this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy

Something more /tech/ related:

Nvidas fake patent lawsuit against ATI where a corrupt judge banned ATI sales in hope of bleeding the company dry before it being resolved.

Summary of PDF related which is well-sourced:

>Microsoft cucked a wide range of competitors by means of straight-up extortion, manipulation of industry standards, taking the word "proprietary" seriously, giving OEMs incentives if they pre-install M$ software and none from its competitors, sharply raise license fees for OEMs who also made competing non-OS products to M$ software (unless they give in to M$), making sure that their own products depend on proprietary Windows API(s), bundling certain software of their own on Windows (and usually crippling their continued development), and other mafia-like tactics

PLUS, muh telemetry, and finally letting the pajeets run the show.

>>1003283

>Clover can't embed PDFs ln this site

Floens is a hack,

Here the link to the pdf instead:

http://www.ecis.eu/documents/Finalversion_Consumerchoicepaper.pdf

>>1003284

Its up to the BO if you can post PDFs, other boards can but not /tech/.

That document is still missing a whole lot of stuff around DirectX, the true reason why it was created, and the shady shit they did with the likes of 3DFX, ATi, and Nvidia. Although that's still not really public knowledge.

>>1003286

What is >>1001966

>>1003248 (OP)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft

>>1003248 (OP)

>anti-corporate porn

>>>/trannypol/

>>1003248 (OP)

Just search top 1000 most profitable companies.

For one they deliberately violated people's constitutional privacy rights collaborating with the NSA in warrantless surveillance over Skype since at least 2013.

>>1003407

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSAKEY

Do you think it would've been a challenge for the CIA, FBI or NSA to train spies to infiltrate public corporations for the sole purpose of injecting malicious code or subverting companies with their influence?

>>1003489

They don't really need to train people to infiltrate public corporations, cocksuckers like AT&T and Comcast hand over user data willingly if they're paid for it.

>>1003513

M$ has been transferring it's focus away from Windows since the failure of Windows 8, so I don't find it surprising they haven't done anything against chromebooks. Also, a semblance of competition can be very helpful. See Intel vs AMD prior to AMD64.

>Document I revealed that "FUD" (spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt) was a traditional Microsoft marketing strategy, acknowledged and understood internally.[1] Examples of Microsoft's FUD tactics are announcing nonexistent products or spreading rumors that competing products will crash Windows.[5] Raymond suggests that the documents show that while Microsoft may have been dismissive of open source software in public, it privately considers it a serious competitor.

>In discussing ways of competing with open source, Document I suggests that one reason that open source projects have been able to enter server market is its use of standardized protocols. The document then suggests that this can be stopped by "extending these protocols and developing new protocols" and "de-commoditize protocols & applications." This policy has been internally nicknamed "embrace, extend, extinguish". Document I also suggests that open source software "is long-term credible ... FUD tactics can not be used to combat it," and "Recent case studies (the Internet) provide very dramatic evidence ... that commercial quality can be achieved / exceeded by OSS projects."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_documents

>>1003513

Microsoft doesn't give a fuck about windows outside enterprise, they're putting all their resources into the (((cloud))) with azure

>>1003248 (OP)

The problem, OP, is that such a list would be invariably subjective. Rather, you should educate yourself on M$, and in so doing come to your own conclusions, rather than parroting arguments of others.

check this https://stallman.org/microsoft.html

>>1003248 (OP)

Yes. The list of Linux Foundation platinum members.

>>1003977

I made up my mind a long time ago that Microsoft was an evil company. The problem is I never really compiled all the things that convinced me so that I could persuade others. I got into an argument with someone the other day about why Microsoft is bad and all I could really say was that Windows 10 is built from the ground up to spy on the user and it's hard to turn off all the spyware features.

“Embrace, Extend, Extinguish”

>>1004027

Right, but rather than looking at some bloggers opinion, you ought to do your own research. You say you made up your mind, but you seem to know little proof. Perhaps you made an uniformed decision? When so many people hate something, it's hard to not get caught up in that anon.

If you have such a strong opinion that Microsoft is evil (a serious indictment), should you also know reasons to believe this is true other than an ambiguous "muh botnet".

RUMOR: M$ to use someone else's botnet product in order to become the shitty Edge browser's replacement as Wangblows 10's default browser

>M$ extinguishing IE by building an all-new web browser of their own, belatedly "porting" it to mobile platforms, and then the Wangblows 10 version being extinguished "due to user complaints"? Wew.

http://archive.is/c4huU

>>1004382

Well for one their phony "open" standards with their Office file formats are deliberately anti-competitive against other office-type software. The feeling of entrapment with every Office suite with their shitty fucking ribbon interface since 2007 made me mad enough to finally switch permanently to LibreOffice several years back.

I like to approach Microsoft from the standpoint of trying to live a Microsoft-free life. What are all the obstacles they put in place to try and cage their users in? Every time I have to save a document in a not-actually-open-but-hidden-and-obfuscated modern Office format to send to someone else there is always something that ends up fucked up about it.