I did not mean to insinuate that playing multiplayer between Java and Bedrock was possible at some point. I mean to say that playing multiplayer "Minecraft" between Linux, Windows and macOS was possible, but is no longer possible, since "Minecraft" is now a product which doesn't work on Linux and macOS.
If you don't see how what I described could be characterized as "hostile", you've either misunderstood something, or we have a different understanding of what "hostile" means.
A company takes a game that had a very lively multiplayer community, replaces the game engine that was based on software that could run on any platform as long as it supported Java to .NET where the only possible platform is Windows. Take everyone who has ever purchased the game and force them to migrate their accounts to a Microsoft account in order to continue playing, then intentionally make the two versions of the game incompatible just to force people to play a watered down "definitive edition" that still lacks many of the features that allowed the community to thrive in the first place while issuing all these updates that essentially equate to "spyware".
Yes, I think the word you are looking for is, in fact, Hostile.
Nitpick: Bedrock edition uses C++ not .NET. Either of these could support Linux in principle (as noted, Bedrock edition runs on ChromeOS over a Linux kernel), but Microsoft doesn't care to facilitate that.
No, it's not the word _I_ am looking for. They still release and support Java Edition. Thereby supporting those users. Therefore, decidedly _not_ hostile.
If you don't see how what I described could be characterized as "hostile", you've either misunderstood something, or we have a different understanding of what "hostile" means.