> Or perhaps because many people have been conditioned to
> dislike anything Microsoft does without actually
> analyzing it's impact or relevance.
> Certainly it seems like there aren't many rational facts
> to thia person's argument.
I already explained how Microsoft has a history of violating people's trusts, and how an investment in Microsoft's technologies is therefore risky.
> Why wasn't it bad when V8 came out and enabled node?
This is off-topic: you don't know my opinion of V8 or Google. My opinion on V8, good or bad, also does not change the validity of my criticisms.
> Why is there a different standard you apply to
> Microsoft's open source efforts?
You don't know me personally, so it's presumptive of you to assume I'm applying a standard unevenly.
You have done nothing to address the criticisms of Microsoft, instead you have resorted to cheap red herrings -- a tell-tale sign of a lost argument. Until you decide to actually provide an argument of substance against what I've said, rather than arrogant name-calling and presumptive assumptions regarding my standards for open source, this conversation cannot serve any constructive purpose.
Corporations are not people. Holding grudges against them as if they are people and not a social construct that changes over time makes 0 sense.
They have new management that is doing a lot of great things. The number of bad things they do is going down. Many of their products are genuinely good now. They're oing out of their way to improve their support for the broader developer ecosystem.
At this point, I "like" them a lot more than I like Apple or any of the hapless desktop Linux Distribution corporate governance bodies.
