Re: @dogged Too bad
> That's like saying that a car that can do 200mph is better than one that can't because it can, even though you will never use it.
Actually that is likely to be true, for certain connotations of 'better'. In order to be able to do 200mph it must have suspension, tires and bearings capable of withstanding those speeds, carefully crafted aerodynamics, and must pass safety tests.
Of course it is likely to be useless for going to the supermarket, but that wasn't what it is 'better' at.
> My point is that it is irrational to assume that somebody lovely and friendly is checking the code for you.
The fact that the code _can_ be checked is incentive to ensure that backdoors and 'phone homes' are not added. There are also _thousands_ of contributors who _are_ checking code and who have no affiliation.
> more checkins to the linux kernel are made from @microsoft.com addresses than any other domain,
You do spout a load of rubbish:
"""According to The Linux Foundation, this is "the first time, Microsoft appears on list of companies that are contributing to the Linux kernel. Ranking at number 17"""
As far as I can tell this contribution was a one-off to supports MS's Hyper-V so that it can sell Windows Server running on Linux boxes and can run Linux on Windows Sever. This is to sell Windows, not to help Linux.
> religious lunatics on El Reg go on about Microsoft's shitty code
I don't think that anyone has commented on code _quality_, it is unlikely they would pass a judgement on code they haven't seen. They do, however, comment on known areas, such as the existence of backdoors and 'phoning home'.