> As for your accusation of fud, fud by defnition is about false or disinformation in combination with the appeal to fear.
By what definition? FUD is literally just the words "Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt." Nothing about those words requires the thing being referred to to be false or disinformation.
Less pedantically, propaganda/astroturfing doesn't need to be a lie or an exaggeration or anything of the sort, to serve its purpose. You get just as much of an effect from selectively highlighting some true facts while downplaying others.
The irony the parent is referring to is that you are highlighting some facts about Microsoft [which support the story you wish to tell] while downplaying others [which do not], and so your comment serves as effective anti-Microsoft propaganda (i.e. "FUD") whether or not every statement in it is true.
> As for what power, I don't know how you can be serious and ask such a question.
Likely because—at least if they live in SV—it's almost assuredly true that almost nobody the parent knows uses Microsoft products any more. They have no cultural power, in the sense of having control of cultural influencers. They might still have a large foothold in the enterprise, but—unless there is a massive resurgence—that foothold will die exactly one generation of IT people from now, when nobody of the new generation will have bothered to learn the Windows stack.
> We have, for years at that. See above gnu.org link for a start.
You are not debating charitably here. There is a difference—and you know it—between "what you fear" in a general, ideological sense; and immediate fears of what can and is likely to happen given the current landscape.
The parent poster is asking the latter: what about the current Microsoft—without reference to history, without knowledge of history—do you fear?
> what about the current Microsoft—without reference to history, without knowledge of history—do you fear?
Win10 and how it was shoved hard down everyone's throat -- and how it had taken upgrade liberties away from the vast majority, while adding unstoppable telemetry.
Is 18 months too much history for a 40 year old company?
By what definition? FUD is literally just the words "Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt." Nothing about those words requires the thing being referred to to be false or disinformation.
Less pedantically, propaganda/astroturfing doesn't need to be a lie or an exaggeration or anything of the sort, to serve its purpose. You get just as much of an effect from selectively highlighting some true facts while downplaying others.
The irony the parent is referring to is that you are highlighting some facts about Microsoft [which support the story you wish to tell] while downplaying others [which do not], and so your comment serves as effective anti-Microsoft propaganda (i.e. "FUD") whether or not every statement in it is true.
> As for what power, I don't know how you can be serious and ask such a question.
Likely because—at least if they live in SV—it's almost assuredly true that almost nobody the parent knows uses Microsoft products any more. They have no cultural power, in the sense of having control of cultural influencers. They might still have a large foothold in the enterprise, but—unless there is a massive resurgence—that foothold will die exactly one generation of IT people from now, when nobody of the new generation will have bothered to learn the Windows stack.
> We have, for years at that. See above gnu.org link for a start.
You are not debating charitably here. There is a difference—and you know it—between "what you fear" in a general, ideological sense; and immediate fears of what can and is likely to happen given the current landscape.
The parent poster is asking the latter: what about the current Microsoft—without reference to history, without knowledge of history—do you fear?