3 ms·

Visual Studio Code is a bad name. - It draws comparisons to Visual Studio- even though Code isn't really an IDE (nor is it supposed to be) - It's really bad f

Visual Studio Code is a bad name. - It draws comparisons to Visual Studio- even though Code isn't really an IDE (nor is it supposed to be) - It's really bad for SEO, searching for "how to do X in Visual Studio Code" pulls hundreds of existing posts on how to do that thing in classic VS. That's going to disrupt developer experience for both VS and Code. - It's confusing for developers wanting to download Code, or VS; too easy to mistake one for the other. The SEO problem is a bad one, because it gets worse as each project gets older. I'd even be ok if it were MS Code or something, but VS Code is actually a bad name.

tracker1 11y ago
As for being an IDE, it's headed that way... there's debugger integration for node and go, while python (from upstream comments) is being worked on. I haven't used the integrated debugger/runtime, but it seems to be going that way... As a straight editor though, definitely more lightweight than any IDE I've used.
Yuioup 11y ago
That's the entire idea behind the name. When you go to the website or start searching around for "Visual Studio Code" you quickly end up with links to Visual Studio (obviously) and Azure. Make no mistake. Microsoft is not developing Visual Studio code out of the goodness of their hearts. This is a marketing strategy to get people to move to Azure.
- badloginagain 11y ago
  Developing Code out of the goodness of their hearts? No. Developing Code as part of some convoluted marketing strategy that cannot be measured? Also no. More likely they're developing Code to compete with Sublime Text and the like. They don't have a product in that market and Microsoft's strategy is what it's always been: gaining marketshare. Microsoft's success is [now] defined by developers active on MS technology. It underlies the open-sourcing of technologies long held proprietary, as well as the responsiveness to developer feedback. Long term, I suspect the theory is if MS has a majority stake in the developer market, it can start defining the technology the world runs on (again). Its more of a give-take relationship though, with MS devoting resources to the resources developers actually use.
  - Yuioup 11y ago
    Agreed. But it is not only open-sourcing their own technology, it's earning money off of other open source technologies (which is perfectly legitimate). Want to run Linux? Pay Microsoft. Want to run Redis? Pay Microsoft. Want to run the next great open source project which I will invent tomorrow in my basement which will go on to be used by millions of users? Pay Microsoft. BTW it may sound like I'm being harsh on Microsoft but actually I think their strategy is brilliant. It legitimizes Open Source in every single way and shows the world that you can make money off of it - lots of money. Open Source developers should be rejoicing now that they have been vindicated after so many years of not being taken seriously and even being called "Communists".
  - zamalek 11y ago
    Long term, I would expect Azure tooling to make an appearance in VSC.

tracker1 11y ago

As for being an IDE, it's headed that way... there's debugger integration for node and go, while python (from upstream comments) is being worked on. I haven't used the integrated debugger/runtime, but it seems to be going that way... As a straight editor though, definitely more lightweight than any IDE I've used.

Yuioup 11y ago

That's the entire idea behind the name. When you go to the website or start searching around for "Visual Studio Code" you quickly end up with links to Visual Studio (obviously) and Azure. Make no mistake. Microsoft is not developing Visual Studio code out of the goodness of their hearts. This is a marketing strategy to get people to move to Azure.

badloginagain 11y ago
Developing Code out of the goodness of their hearts? No. Developing Code as part of some convoluted marketing strategy that cannot be measured? Also no. More likely they're developing Code to compete with Sublime Text and the like. They don't have a product in that market and Microsoft's strategy is what it's always been: gaining marketshare. Microsoft's success is [now] defined by developers active on MS technology. It underlies the open-sourcing of technologies long held proprietary, as well as the responsiveness to developer feedback. Long term, I suspect the theory is if MS has a majority stake in the developer market, it can start defining the technology the world runs on (again). Its more of a give-take relationship though, with MS devoting resources to the resources developers actually use.
- Yuioup 11y ago
  Agreed. But it is not only open-sourcing their own technology, it's earning money off of other open source technologies (which is perfectly legitimate). Want to run Linux? Pay Microsoft. Want to run Redis? Pay Microsoft. Want to run the next great open source project which I will invent tomorrow in my basement which will go on to be used by millions of users? Pay Microsoft. BTW it may sound like I'm being harsh on Microsoft but actually I think their strategy is brilliant. It legitimizes Open Source in every single way and shows the world that you can make money off of it - lots of money. Open Source developers should be rejoicing now that they have been vindicated after so many years of not being taken seriously and even being called "Communists".
- zamalek 11y ago
  Long term, I would expect Azure tooling to make an appearance in VSC.