I would more think that they switch from Crowdstrike to another Company. Because that is easier like to change a whole OS Infrastructure.
1 Like
That might make more sense but the people don't employ Crowdstrike, MS do, and I guess they have contracts with clauses in place.
I think the most important thing is that everyday, normal people suddenly realised just how much power MS has world wide, and I think that scared a lot of people (and governments).
The push from MS - literally forcing people to upgrade to Windows 11 is making people angry too - it's why I'm here! I learned from YouTubers like Chris Titus, and others, how to stop the forced update, and many more valuable tricks to prevent MS doing what it likes with my machine, but it is the fact that they're withdrawing support from the "tamed WX" I have running that has forced me to find an alternative. I've been fighting them for control of my laptops for years, but now I want nothing more to do with them.
If, for work, I'm forced to use some MS apps, I'll instal a VM inside Linux and try to run it that way. Time will tell me how things are going to go. I'll just keep reading as much as possible, watching as many guides and tutorials I can, and learn to be free... I managed it with Windows, I'm sure, given enough time, I can get better with Linux too... I like a challenge and I love learning!
Again, CrowdStrike was given permission by Delta Airlines, for example, to modify Windows. MS is not responsible for the error made by CrowdStrike to modify how Windows operates. That's how CrowStrike's software works - in real-time making changes to the system in order to prevent a security breach of some kind. That's the equivalent of you taking your new car and taking it to some special garage to upgrade the engine, transmission, and suspension. If they made a mistake in their respective modifications, you can't hold car maker or dealer responsible. Given that Linux is open source, CrowdStrike could just as easily make the same error in Linux. The key point here is that Delta Airlines (in my example) contracted with CrowStrike to provide a security service that modified the original MS code if CS detected some live malware in-progress. That is what Delta Airlines knowingly wanted and contracted for. I get the hate for MS but how can you blame MS when clearly CrowdSrike is culpable for their negligence?
1 Like
Moderator Note:
Just to a reminder to all members to try staying on (or reasonably near) the topic of the thread.
Tangents are a part of internet discussions (In other words inevitable). However, a flag was sent in suggesting that the recent tangent (MS and Crowdstrike) detract from the O.P.
I have reviewed the topic and thread, reading each post and in my estimation, I see a tangent beginning to form; But MS and Crowdstrike and its effects on Windows Users that may look for GnuLinux alternatives is pretty close to the topic - and the content of the interview. This one could go either way... But I think leaving the thread unsplit and allowing members to regroup and orient is the better way to go.
When you respond to a tangential thought; it helps to include a paragraph that hits the topic on the head (as several posts in this thread have done.)
1 Like
4 posts were split to a new topic: Microsoft Secure Boot SBAT affecting Linux Boot
@anon50265909 , I see your point - you are right.
I still think blaming EU regulations for EU based machines is a get out though. The EU has no control over what goes on with policy in India and the USA.
...and I'm biased against MS - spot on!
@Aravisian , point taken. Sorry for the extra work.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.