Microsoft getting nervous about Europe's tech independence

Data sovereignty is going to be key to maintaining any sovereignity going forward, it's so vital to the function of society and the economy that outsourcing it to another country is just giving part of yourself away.

Well, you can safely store it with trusted allies….
- Don't give up sovereignity, even to allies! Alliances change, but even ignoring that, it's akin to letting allies run your infrastructure or make your policies or own your water. It's giving part of yourself away.
- Ah yes the ever so reliable us !

Seems like a natural response of Europe to Trump's policies. I'm not sure why anyone would be surprised.

It's kinda like good guy Hitler, because he killed Hitler.
Trump's major achievement might be that the rest of the world starts relying less on the US.

The world order that created America's prosperity was ultra violence and super imperialism resulting in the deaths, abject suffering, and domination of hundreds of millions around the globe for a century.

"We will store backup copies of our code in a secure repository in Switzerland, and we will provide our European partners with the legal rights needed to access and use this code if needed for this purpose."

If Microsoft is going to actually risk giving access to their source code then they’re really scared!

Pretty sure that they already shared it with copilot, so I'm guessing that it's only a matter of time until everyone has a copy..
That's SOP for government contracts. The US government, and others, have had access in the past. NDA blah blah blah.
- It sounds like this would be expanding that to a lot more commercial customers, though?
And maybe they figure EU leaders aren't smart enough to ask for reproducible builds.

Microsoft should be getting worried about Linux.

Tbh no not really, as long a OEMs either dont ship Linux at all or only niche OEMs do (or major OEMs on a small subset of their products) Linux will be a niche. The European Market still relies on American OEMs which means they have been cornered by Microsoft.
- Some brands are starting to ship without windows already and are announcing it loud and clear. Lenovo made the news this week
Azure runs almost entirely on Linux. MS has no need to be afraid of it.
Yes, but currently Linux isn't a valid option for a lot of users, because a lot of professional and corporation apps, apart of most games are Windows only. To rise Linux is needed to change this first. The only alternative for this issue is maybe using instead eg. WindowsX, something like an "de-microsofted" Windows. Linux is certainly the best alternative, but also has some drawbacks, like too much different distros not always compatible one with another, depending on the distro also often an deficient support and maintance, certain driver problems, among others. Not good if an still minority OS is above to diversified, which cause a lot of problems for the devs of software. To dethrone Windows as leader of the market does it still need a lot of work in many environments.
- I, a Linux user, agree that there is work to be done, but I disagree with the "this needs to change first" on proprietary software availability. Specifically the "first" bit.
  Let me explain why: The problem of software availability is a chicken and egg problem. No users on an OS = no developers make stuff for it = no users because there is no software.
  With Wine/Proton, Valve "fixed" this issue for gamers. This "opened the floodgates", and at least in one group of computer users, made Linux viable as a daily driver. People who play video games are diverse, and have different needs for software outside gaming, so this change grew the userbase of every category of software in Linux, not just games.
  With an actual userbase comes both a community of people, who are all potential contributors for FOSS, whether that's programming, docs, or reporting issues. And a marketshare for businesses to target (and profit off of).
  The ball has clearly started rolling, Linux is gaining marketshare at a pace it hasn't seen before. The bigger the userbase gets, the more software will work overall. The more software, the more people who can switch.
  There isn't a single definable point where software availability suddenly makes a userbase appear, these two grow together.
  So yes, there is work to be done, but no, it doesn't "need to change first".
  A lot of people find out after using Linux that it's perfect for their daily tasks. A lot of other people never bother, and thus never find out. With Windows 10 EOL coming up, and MS pushing more and more onto users (like recall and copilot), a portion of people forced to switch will look for alternatives, or will try out Linux because they've heard of it as an alternative.
  As for your other arguments:
  too much different distros not always compatible one with another
  Which used to be true, but is significantly better than even a couple years ago. "Standardized" packaging like Flatpak makes a ton of software available on all distros, ensuring compatibility. Valve took a shot at this too with Steam Linux Runtime, but this hasn't seen any use outside Steam.
  depending on the distro also often an deficient support and maintance,
  For the vast majority of distros, no. Though I agree that we (the community as a whole) should stop accepting terrible resources for finding Linux distros (like "top 10 distros" lists that make no sense to a new user) and push for better ones.
  certain driver problems, among others.
  Which is being solved too. "driver problems" is exclusively Nvidia, but the issues are (very slowly) being fixed (by nvidia), and distros are offering easy options for getting the Nvidia drivers. Nouveau/NVK is also on the slow cooker, but I trust it'll come out great. "Among others" is not a valid reason.
  Not good if an still minority OS is above to diversified, which cause a lot of problems for the devs of software.
  Which fits into the point of Flatpaks for proprietary software, and highlights where FOSS truly shines. Flatpaks standardize the runtime, proprietary software only needs to support this one standard to support all distros. FOSS devs can target whatever they want for their project. If "works on my machine" is good enough for them, so be it. (People will always complain about stuff like this though). If a distro wants to officially provide some open source software to its users, it has to be packaged. With the packaging process for a distro, modifications might need to be made, which can often be contributed back to upstream.
  To dethrone Windows as leader of the market does it still need a lot of work in many environments.
  It's a lot closer than you think. It's already a viable daily driver for many. The biggest blocker is the fact that MS is a global megacorp, with advertising, OEM "support", and a lot of money to "persuade" people and companies to use Windows.
  OEM support also ties into the whole "choosing a distro". I trust that even the worst OEMs choose at least a supported distro, which takes all pressure away from the user. When Linux marketshare grows enough for OEMs to provide the option, the least technical users going to a brick and mortar store will be presented with "100$ cheaper, but looks different than your current computer". If Windows UI keeps being as inconsistent as it currently is, it would have similar impact for non-technical users going between Windows N and N+1 as it does going to Linux.
- It's not a plug and play solution yet but Winapps exists and can run almost any Windows software on Linux using RDP.
- For business usage, it's really just Debian and Red Hat as options, along with their derivatives. For personal use, add Arch to the list.
  Other distros exist but people don't generally need to worry about them, their stability or compatibility, etc. This includes developers as well as users.
- This is just right. Massive amounts of corporations have a complete dependency on Microsoft Office. In a way that cannot be substituted by Libreoffice or similar.
  Change need to happen. But there need to be a viable alternative before it.

Good, fuck microsoft.

We recognize that our business is critically dependent on sustaining the trust of customers, countries, and governments across Europe. We respect European values, comply with European laws, and actively defend Europe's cybersecurity. Our support for Europe has always been – and always will be – steadfast.

None of that matters, since they still have to comply to American laws, which means they have to give access to European data if the US government requests it.

Wrong, MS EU have to comply EU GDPR laws, yes or yes. They have learned it after several high fines, like also Facebook and Google, even X planned in the past to stop the service in the EU because of this. They can't send userdata to third countries without the express consent of the user. Privacy in the EU is an human right protected by law. MS is scared with a reason.
- If you want to be pedantic about it - if the NSA, or any such agency demands to place a [backdoor of any sort] in an American company's datacenter, they have to comply.
  So, no, they (meta, Google, etc) won't be handing over the data knowingly. But those devices placed there for sure aren't running Minecraft servers.

I would think the Chinese government switching all government PCs and servers to KylinOS by 2026, would be weighing on all US tech companies.

Certainly the Blacklight test show that Microsoft EU respect way more the privacy (forced by law) than Microsoft US.

What test?

But really, I read the whole article and there’s nothing mentioned about a blacklight test.
https://themarkup.org/blacklight
In Options in the search bar you can filter the country US or EU
- Oh I see. That's just measuring tracking scripts on websites. It's not particularly relevant to what is discussed in the article (data sovereignty of cloud providers).
Blacklight test
- You're going to link me to youtube shorts?
  Please, no.
- I hadn't seen that sketch in a little while, I was pleasantly surprised to see they added 14 additional audio tracks with translations. I wish that was more common, making humour more international like that.