![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://feddit.nu/api/v3/image_proxy?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffry.gs%2Fpictrs%2Fimage%2Fc6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
It’s a play by monopolys. They create a large platform (often free to start), integrate it with a bunch of other stuff, then charge you to use it. They can use the invested cost to leverage anyone on the platform, because it’s often an expensive lengthy process to halt processes. The ruling is essentially stating that Microsoft either needs to allow non Microsoft accounts to chat on teams or allow you to remove your word subscription without affecting your email. Both of those are good things for consumers, but Microsoft wants to hold all of the cards on all sides, and start offering bundles like cable companies. All just to limit your options and squeeze you when they want more.
Cisco as a client tried to force ipv6 for their managed service and after an entire quarter of attempting to resolve it, we actually disabled it for their virtual address per their request. IPv4 has issues and IPv6 promises solutions, but it’s not a stable platform yet. This appears ignorant but is based on truth. IPv6 is also eventually going to hit exhaustion with the frequency we spin up virtual machines, it’s okay to skip a bad generation.