• 8oow3291d@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Despite the fact that Microsoft was where it was then because IBM had chosen DOS for its PC operating system until that time.

    Is this actually morally bad? Unless MS had promised otherwise, isn’t it just competition?

    • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Admittedly, the morality of this particular point probably relies on further context. On its face, I suppose you’re correct. However, it’s worth pointing out that for instance the only reason DOS was chosen is because Bill Gates’ Mom was on the IBM board (also because the owners of Digital Research blew it, but that’s a story for another time). Further, IBM had funded Microsoft pretty heavily to help development of the NT kernel with super cushy terms because of the aforementioned relationship with the board. So while, yes, on the one hand you could classify this as competition and it’s a little hard to feel bad for giant corporations, on the other hand this was Bill Gates being a twat and taking advantage of what was essentially a favor. There’s a reason the movie about him and Steve Jobs back in the day was called “Pirates of Silicon Valley“.