I’m not sure where I stand on this issue. Preventing spying and hidden targeting of consumers is one thing.
But in some ways this crusade seems like a form of DEI. Why should a company that builds computers make computers that can run any operating system? Why not buy a computer from a source that offers that function or build your own from components. Did Americans really gain from the breakup of ATT.
Why not err in the direction of letting the marketplace decide. It’s not that we don’t have examples of startups revolutionizing an existing niches and commanding market share in a few years. I don’t like fingers on the scale or asking companies to work against their own profitability.
Consumers always have the right to walk or to use another source. The Government support of alternative energy solution has been a wasteful boondoggle and distorted the marketplace. It has also allowed graft and improper use of public money. Isn’t the attack on tech companies similar? Preventing tracking or making tracking easy to opt out of, making it illegal to selll users data is a good use of oversight. Giving a legup to competitors is not.
“Why should a company that builds computers make computers that can run any operating system? “
Simple... Because when you purchase it they do not own it anymore you do. Would you buy a car from a manufacturer who forces you to only buy your gas from one source? Or force you to only allow certain people or products to be carried in it? A car that forever belongs to the manufacturer of that car and never you?
No... And it should not be like this with computers either. It is NOT theirs anymore once you purchase it. And this is what MS and manufacturers are doing... They are bullying consumers in to allow them to retain perpetual ownership when they have no right. It does NOT belong to them anymore and the consumer should have the right to do what they like with the product they purchased.