• logicbomb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’d think it would be obvious that a country wouldn’t want to depend on a foreign country’s proprietary product when an open source alternative exists. Even if it’s not spying, what if the US forced Microsoft to put some kill switch on their products? Even if it doesn’t affect your most secure systems because of air gap, it could still cripple enough to cause huge problems.

    There’s simply no reason to take the risk.

    If I was running a government, I would strongly desire proof that all of my government software is doing only what I want it to. That means not only do I have access to the source code, but I also need it to be simple enough that my government teams can actually audit all of it.

    Obviously, that’s not going to be feasible in every situation. There might be proprietary software that is protected from competition via IP laws, and some software is so necessarily complex that it would be really hard to audit completely, but overall, I find it shocking that any foreign government would run a Microsoft product when a feature comparable open source alternative exists.

    • altphoto@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      Plus everyone benefits. Even Microsoft would benefit from healthy competition… Instead of making shit software, they should fix the problems.

      • Sturgist@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        M$ and Apple both extensively use OSS projects in the creation and maintenance of their own products. And neither really fund many/any of the projects they use. So this would directly benefit them even further.