This project isn’t driven by a single reason or a blanket hatred of technology companies. Each of the big tech giants—Google, Microsoft, and Meta—presents its own set of concerns that, taken together, make staying in their ecosystems untenable for me.
Google: The Best Product, The Worst Privacy
Let me be clear: Google still has the best services. Gmail’s search functionality is unmatched. Google Drive’s collaboration features are seamless. The integration across their ecosystem is genuinely impressive. I’m not leaving because the products are bad—I’m leaving because I can no longer accept the trade-off.
Google’s priority isn’t security, and it’s definitely not privacy. Their business model depends on knowing everything about you, and while they’ve built exceptional tools, those tools come at a cost I’m no longer willing to pay. When privacy violations happen in the place that matters most—my email, the digital hub of my entire life—there’s simply no other option but to leave.
This is the hardest breakup because the alternatives will require real sacrifice in quality and functionality.
Microsoft: The Slow March Toward Lock-In
With Microsoft, the concern isn’t primarily privacy or security—it’s the direction they’re heading. We’re watching a company that increasingly wants to force you into their ecosystem to use their services. The constant pressure to sign in, to link your account, to integrate everything through their cloud infrastructure.
It’s not as aggressive as Google’s data collection, but it’s a similar pattern of control. They’re building walls around their garden, and I’d rather leave before those walls get too high to climb over.
Meta: No Regard for Users
Meta is the easiest case to make. This is a company that has demonstrated, repeatedly, that it has little to no regard for user security or privacy. The business model is surveillance, the track record is abysmal, and the direction shows no signs of improvement.
WhatsApp remains a necessary evil for now—everyone I know is on it—but it’s one of the first services I want to isolate and eventually replace.
Reality Check: Compromises Are Inevitable
Here’s the honest truth: I won’t be able to leave everything. Some services are too embedded in my professional life. Some alternatives simply don’t exist yet, or aren’t good enough to justify the switch. Some relationships and communities are locked into platforms I can’t control.
That’s fine. This isn’t about purity.
The goal is to minimize my dependence on big tech where possible, and where it’s not possible, to isolate those services as much as I can. Separate browsers, limited permissions, no cross-contamination with the rest of my digital life.
Every service I can replace, I will. Every service I can’t, I’ll contain.
The philosophy is simple: intentional use instead of passive dependence. Own what I can. Isolate what I can’t. Document everything so others can make their own informed decisions.
Because ultimately, this isn’t about achieving some theoretical ideal of digital purity. It’s about taking back control where it’s possible, accepting the compromises where it’s not, and being honest about the difference.