A huge problem at Microsoft seems to me to be that people there, or maybe just the leaders, seem socially unsophisticated. In fact, neither of the articles quoted below explains the underlying reason that Microsoft is buying Revolution Analytics. That needs to be explained. (All quotes retrieved Sunday, January 25, 2015, around 07:00 PST.)

In The Official Microsoft Blog there is a lot of corporate-speak, of the kind used by people with no actual interest in a subject who nevertheless want to be considered knowledgeable:
"find ... value"
"data-driven decisions"
"reduce the ... skills gap"
"enterprise-class platform"
"analytic solutions"
"advanced analytics within ... platforms on-premises"
"we are at the threshold"

From another article linked from that article, Revolution Analytics joins Microsoft, by "David Smith, Chief Community Officer":

"Microsoft might seem like a strange bedfellow for an open-source company..."

It was not a good idea to use the word "bedfellow". That word is more appropriate for a novel. The primary meaning of "bedfellow" is "a person who shares a bed with another".

'CEO Satya Nadella proclaimed "Microsoft loves Linux" '

On the surface, that makes no sense. Below the surface, is Microsoft trying to say, "We want Microsoft to be popular"?

"We're excited the work..."

That should have been "We're excited [that] the work...".

I'm not the only person who feels uncomfortable with those statements. One of the comments to that story is this one:

"What a joke. You're really working hard to try and convince readers that this is a good match, going on and on about how supportive Microsoft is of open-source. You were probably sweating while trying to come up with excuses as to why this is good, knowing that you were typing bullshit. I would suggest growing a pair of balls and just being honest, but I'm sure you've never had to do that in your career. -- Posted by: Anonymous | January 23, 2015 at 11:22"

David Smith replied to that comment: "Anonymous, I've never been anything but frank on this blog and this is no exception. I'm truly excited for the future, and I'm sure I speak for the rest of the team as well. -- Posted by: David Smith | January 23, 2015 at 11:25"

Sometimes the lack of social ability at Microsoft is shocking. The cover of the January 16, 2013 issue of BusinessWeek magazine has a large photo of Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer with the headline calling him "Monkey Boy". See the BusinessWeek cover in this article: Steve Ballmer Is No Longer A Monkey Boy, Says Bloomberg BusinessWeek. The BusinessWeek cover says "No More" and "Mr.", but that doesn't take much away from the fact that the magazine called him Monkey Boy -- on its cover.

In many years of following such things I have never seen such disrespect of a CEO. Of course, whoever wrote the cover headline was merely repeating a common phrase applied to Steve Ballmer by people in the computer industry.

Worst CEO: Quote from an article in Forbes Magazine about Steve Ballmer: "Without a doubt, Mr. Ballmer is the worst CEO of a large publicly traded American company today."

Another quote: "The reach of his bad leadership has extended far beyond Microsoft when it comes to destroying shareholder value -- and jobs." (May 12, 2012)

Thanks very much for the link. It's helpful.

I've been an advertising copywriter for technology ad agencies. Here is something that may be helpful for you: I suggest you work on creating a better way of explaining what you are trying to say.

I visited the link you gave and became confused. It says, "Powered by Malwarebytes". My guess is that it would take me an hour to decide what is being communicated. And, I already know about host files.

If you put more effort into explaining, every reader would find it far easier to understand what you have to say.

I'm interested in anything anyone has to say about Malwarebytes.

"... runs into the millions."

Yes, but Microsoft is taking in millions from "Enterprise" users. See the sub-heading "Large customers are paying huge amounts" in Microsoft Windows XP "end of life": Conflict of interest.