Are there any legitimate reasons to hate Microsoft? As a business, they brought computers to the masses, GUI interfaces, the internet, lax licensing security where even though thousands of people pirate its OS, they don't go around suing everyone.
A lot of us were raised on Windows and gathered in a lot of cool websites just like today, all because of Microsoft. So why does it get so much hate? Is there any legitimate reasons to actually hate Microsoft?
>Are there any legitimate reasons to hate Microsoft?
Yes, since literally everything you said is false.
Ibm brought compjters to the masses, msdos was just an option for available os's at the time. Additionally, msdos and windows were intentionally made easy to pirate. The idea was that more people using it, regardles if they paid for it, would breed familiarity to microsoft's os. Apple is doing the same thing now by supplying schools with ipads so that when those crotch gremlins grow up, they by more apple shit because they're familiar with it. Microsoft get's so much hate now because you don't actually own your own os with newer versions of windows and they collect as much information about their users that they can in order to sell it to big data and marketing agencies. With windows 11 they're becoming more dictorial by having specific pc parts that are allowed to be used
I love how the industry loves to snub and hate Microsoft so much that they won't even include its initial in FAANG. But compared to every single other one of those companies, Microsoft is the only one with a robust and diversified product line with varied and durable income streams. Every single other one relies on one or in the case of Amazon two monolithic income streams.
Literally everything they've done since DOS.
Neither IBM nor Microsoft brought the Computer to the masses as in introduced the first personal computers. Apple did that. But if you mean, the one who popularized them, i'd give more credit to MS than IBM on that one.
The biggest mistake they made was not going with a Unix like OS, and instead just sticking with whatever bullshit they bought from that 1 man software company in Seattle.
They literally could have just copied Unix, it already existed.
Instead we have the clunky bullshit legacy of DOS still existing to the day in various forms in windows.
I really think at the time Bill Gates thought the OS didn't matter. In his mind it didn't matter as long as you were selling software, the "ergonomics" of the OS were irrelevant.
They get a lot of hate because they're obviously the biggest. Windows legitimately has ~90% of the desktop market share. They're the "default" operating system. The "average person" operating system.
Apple and Linux can afford to be lean because they are NOT the "defacto" operating system, and thus their users will put up with a lot more shit. Applefags are married to the smug ecosystem and will happily purchase new iterations of software and hardware as Apple cuts support. Getting dicked and being happy about it.
Microsoft made the obvious choice of maintaining backwards compatibility so that they could hold majority market share. I can't respect a billion dollar corporation-- but I can respect that decision. I also respect the devs who managed (past-tense) to pull it off. You can literally upgrade Windows 1.0 through each step to Windows 10, that's fucking impressive.
remember when creating threads this shitty got you a ban? pepperidge farm remembers
>they brought computers to the masses, GUI interfaces
yes, it's legitimate
>A lot of us were raised on Windows
yet worse
> they brought computers to the masses
No, that was just a function of microprocessors getting cheaper and the US military and academia building out the internet.
Could have just as easily had a future of everybody using commodore or apple computers.
>Is Hate For Microsoft legitimate?
yes, it is.
>Apple
they've never been able to get any more of ~20% of global computer sales for their own trash. nobody actually gives a shit about what they do, because their impact on the wider industry is ignored completely. remember when itoddler child molesters were here claiming that pc manufacturers would "abandon" x86 for arm? that was hilarious. the industry continued on as normal, using x86 without a care in the world.
They were pretty shit in the 90s
>20%
10x better than all Linux Distros put together.
Yes. It's the ordinary big E Corp.
what did the child molesting itoddler mean by this? sure, DESKTOP linux system. linux servers power most of the internet. keep up with the class, ijeet.
>old business-oriented and practical microsoft
Yes
>Nu tranny and pajeet-oriented microsoft
Absolutely not.
I do not need any faggot to decide for me whether I can hate something or not.
>robust
Heavy, expensive and cumbersome for the users in other ways as they lock their file formats among other things.
>linux servers power most of the internet.
Keep telling that to yourself. Diverting from a Desktop conversation won't help. Also, anyone who questions the fact that Mac could've grabbed a lot lot more marketshare by adapting their prices and vendor lock in policy is extremely biased. I'm not a Mac User but i was about to make the switch several times only to be turned off by the vendor lock in and prices. Apple does not care about increasing their marketshare directly. They know it wi inevitably happen when the social fabric starts giving meaning to the owner ship of an apple product, be it Mac or iphone, in terms of status among normies.
GUIs come from Xerox, taken over by Apple, marketed more effectively by Microsoft
OS comes from IBM, initially made by some Euro dude who failed to make a deal with IBM only for Gates to take over and steal it all away
most important players in the history of computing are people you've never heard of
> Apple did that
no, IBM did
none of that is about tech though, all about marketing
it's FAGMAN
>no, IBM did
>none of that is about tech though, all about marketing
IBM did not believe that creating pcs for consumers was a market to begin with. The whole concept of personal computing was an Apple thing and it became so popular and demander that IBM had to step in. And they were quickly followed by other manufacturers who used Windows OSes. So either way, regardless of how you look at it. It's either Apple or Microsoft, never IBM.