Is it wrong to use Microsoft products on Linux?

Microsoft's attitude towards Linux and Open Source has been consistently hostile over the last decade and a half, since Steve Ballmer called Linux "a cancer that attaches itself to intellectual property". Now Microsoft may have discovered its Open Source agenda recently, but frankly, I don't care. As far as I'm concerned, that company is like some borderline bipolar ex-partner trying to sneak back into your life, and I'll gladly slam the door in that company's face anytime it rears its ugly head.

I need proof before I'm willing to trust them. And as long as they use their patent portfolio to attack open source companies, or companies attempting to move to open source, any evidence MS demonstrates is surely suspect.

I don't disagree with those sentiments, but for me it comes down to who is in control of my system.

Even though Microsoft might offer some Linux software the company is still oriented to one goal: keeping Microsoft in control of its user's systems. For me, I will not permit vendor-controlled software on my systems.

Look at Microsoft Skype for example. Here you have an application which is now restored so that it again runs in a Linux environment as it did before Microsoft took control of it. Except now if you do a packet analysis on Skype's behavior you will see much encrypted chatter between your Skype application and microsoft.com servers. The software is closed and that chatter is encrypted so we have no way to audit. In other words Microsoft is in control of Linux Skype not the user. That application can operate on your systems with impunity. I call that "Dark Software". Unfortunately Skype went Dark.

Fortunately as a Linux user I have a choice, I can use free and open software with source code that has been reviewed by my peers,

I choose to use software that stands in the light of day.