I agree actually. They're not giving ANYONE incentive to donate to open source, and that mirrors my own experience where the community were asses to me too for my own project (which got lots of publicity including international print media, frontpage slashdot, etc. But after putting up with trolls telling me to do it a different way and calling it crap I dumped it. Fortunately a major distro had a similar idea at the same time and implemented. And thats a distro these same guys have also shat on honestly over the years.

People turned on Redhat too fairly quickly, and they donated a metric ton of code. And my experience in a lot of open source projects honestly is that on most of them, the community contributes next-to-nothing. Canonical too.. SystemD? Constantly getting attacked.

it's why I personally stopped creating my own projects.

If the community stopped using code from these companies they constantly crap on, I think they would be surprised just how little of linux is left (like Wayland is by a Redhat Developer, and Keith Packard from Xorg worked at HP).

And somehow, there is always some weird conspiracy too. Like even releasing Windows 1.0 source code would be something Microsoft does to try to trick linux users or whatever lol

Microsoft primary motivation was not to benefit the community, but to gain good PR in that case. It just so happen that this move also benefits the community as well.

And that's my point. Sometimes, corpos' decisions benefit the community, but this is only a side effect, not the intended purpose.