MikuMikuDance is ancient but somehow manages to use Direct3D features that WINE doesn't implement properly. Maybe Proton does now, but I haven't checked in a couple years.
I have some random monitor from China based on a laptop panel and "HDR mode" seems to mean something along the lines of "without the sRGB EOTF". However, the software support for HDR in Windows 11 is so bad that I just use the sRGB mode instead, which does a really good job.
And government deals. That's why in 2023 children still learn basic office skills on Microsoft's offering. US might be different because I know Chromebooks are popular over there in education.
I'm the IT guy. It's the LOB apps that require windows, not the company. Stop selling us windows-exclusive software and we can talk. Yeah, it's really cool what you can do with wine and proton these days. Can I do that to a bank teller's computer and expect the vendor to answer the phone if something goes wrong?
and honestly, windows is pretty durable these days. 'desktop stuff' is less than 5% of my timesheet and I really do have better things to be doing with my time than trying to achieve the current baseline functionality with noncooperative methods.
I don't know which world you live in, but I am pretty confident that there aren't that many HN users in my software company, even among developers
Even so people (HN or not) won't give up their productivity tool their daily work relies on because of some nuisance or really, ideal. I have seen comments where people are so pissed off by the aggressive ads in Windows that they switched to Linux or Mac, but the number is going to be very small.
Because this would create an environment where an ethical alternative could appear. Although, looking back at the history of Google, a cynic in me says the users will lose in the end anyway.
>Because this would create an environment where an ethical alternative could appear.
That's exactly like saying "if we remove this dictator form this middle eastern warzone, a peaceful and ethical leader will naturally replace him".
No mate, you'll get no ethical alternative, instead Google and friends will immediately take over the power vacuum left by Microsoft before any start-up can even begin hiring.
Nah, your analogy would be replacing that dictator with multiple federal or city governments. Sure, it will not magically make things better, but having changes/competition get started at smaller scales is much easier. So having multiple "google and friends" is preferable over just one.
Sure, there are plenty of alternatives, many are superior, but because of inertia and policies it's difficult to eradicate Microsoft variants. That's why many of us have to put up with broken products like Teams on a daily basis even though everybody (i.e. users, middle management, top management) know they're broken and half-useful when compared to competition.
Changing Operating systems is not a small feat. Also there are MANY enterprise applications that depend on windows, windows server, or Microsoft SQL server. It is not an easy task to migrate away from those. That is why companies pay Microsoft $$$$$$ in licensing.
Because of a "dominant market position". Nobody says "can't appear" or says anything about a literal monopoly or literally not exist (or whether butterflies are made out of butter); that is just short hand and how language works. The point is that any alternative, ethical or not, is much too easily stifled in the current environment. Allowing competition to actually happen would be better.
Because the whole history of Microsoft is based on the EEE paradigm. And now because of inertia it's almost[0] impossible to move away from it for any org that has been using their products for years.
[0] "Almost", because I know some large orgs that finally managed to break away, but it wasn't easy at all.
I was thinking about this recently as someone suggested it might be an American thing. But I don't think so - there are plenty of unethical companies in Europe, too. They often manage to exploit some loophole in the law and, say, sell expensive things to old people under some apparently legitimate guises. Or they'll fake car engine tests.
But ethical (=ethically neutral) companies definitely exist, and there are many of them.
Or, the government should step in and say "No. Have different companies take over different parts of Windows. Do this in two years or pay a 1 trillion dollar fine."
