Summary: This is just the latest example and cautionary tale (the same thing was done to Linux by the same person, who now bosses Linus Torvalds at the Linux Foundation after Microsoft paid for that to happen). Where are the antitrust investigators? Taking instructions from Microsoft's lobbyists?
If your project uses GitHub, then Microsoft is your
boss.
(There's some face-saving PR
here from an
anti-Torvalds troll)
Update:
Microsoft Tim weighs in as well (puff piece). It's him who helped Microsoft hijack Linux (exporting it to GitHub). One day apart
Microsoft Tim distracted from Microsoft's antitrust violations. He became a shameless shill of Microsoft front groups, which are even
hosted by Microsoft (he does not disclose this).
Update #2: There's more information
:
"Littles was elected and took on the role of chair for the Technical Steering Group, hoping to be able to achieve some progress towards Open Source sustainability. However, when he realized that his efforts were futile he resigned from the .NET Foundation board ahead of the 2021 elections which took place in August. He hadn't intended to draw attention to this, but changed his mind when the announcement of the election results reported on his resignation."
Update #3:
The latest Microsoft reputation laundering by Microsoft Tim this week.
Update #4: Simon Sharwood
at it again, relaying Microsoft talking points and face-saving statements.
Update #5: Today the hogwash carries on, with Microsoft Tim
comparing Microsoft's vendor lock-in to
GNOME Foundation.
Update #6: With the
lie at the top about Microsoft "heart" open source, Microsoft's booster Tom Warren does revisionism and 'damage control' for Microsoft, just like those other Microsoft boosters and media operatives, citing the so-called 'Linux' Foundation, which Microsoft pays for PR.
Update #7: You can tell this a major PR crisis for Microsoft because the company's media operatives work overtime doing 'damage control', e.g.
-
Microsoft has enraged the open-source .NET community by removing flagship functionality from open-source .NET to bolster the appeal of Visual Studio, not least against its cross-platform cousin Visual Studio Code.
Update #8: There's this
new explanation of a new controversy:
"The elimination of this function generated even more friction with the developer community (including company personnel, according to some media), since Despite being removed from .NET 6, it will be kept in Visual Studio 2022, Microsoft’s development environment whose launch will take place on November 8. Thus, in this way, a function that was initially going to be found in .NET 6, will suddenly become available only in the development environment, paid, of course, from Microsoft, thus moving away from free software."
Update #9: Today we see a couple of "Open Source" writers commenting on this. In
this first one, the summary is wrong. It shows that there's no community; the 'community' is a company called Microsoft. And meanwhile Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols at ZDNet
became an apologist for the thugs at Microsoft, pretending there's some 'new Microsoft' because they pay (to control) the
Linux Foundation and get to boss Linux Torvalds.
