8 ms·

Being pushed by Microsoft could be exactly the reason not to convert, for many people. Especially when there is no shortage of alternatives that are backed by a

Being pushed by Microsoft could be exactly the reason not to convert, for many people. Especially when there is no shortage of alternatives that are backed by a bit more benevolent entities (Rust, and many other less known variants).

coldtea 10y ago
To put things in perspective, consider than from web browsers and languages, to their respective ill-fated mobile OS efforts, nothing Mozilla created has ever gotten more adoption than something MS created.
- dragandj 10y ago
  Only if we don't count Netscape and JavaScript. They put it in the browser, for better or for worse.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    Why would we count Netscape and Javascript? We're talking about Mozilla. Netscape was a different company -- and besides we're discussing under the context of MS vs benevolent/FOSS entities.
- freeduck 10y ago
  According to w3counter ff and ie are neck to neck. https://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php https://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php Last month ff was ahead
  - majewsky 10y ago
    It depends on the country. In Germany Firefox is actually the most popular browser according to usage statistics (even ahead of Chrome). Source: http://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/13007/umfrage/marktanteile-der-browser-bei-der-internetnutzung-in-deutschland-seit-2009/ http://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/13007/umfrage/... (German statistics office. Paywalled sadly, but you can see the first paragraph that describes Firefox market share at 52%.)
    - nhaehnle 10y ago
      Just FYI, Statista is a private company. You may be thinking of http://destatis.de/ http://destatis.de/, which is the homepage of the German federal office for statistics.
dragandj 10y ago
In reply to myself: The times are changing indeed. It seams that HN-ers started liking Microsoft. Whenever I post some concern, even if only mild, there is first a few upvotes, and then a bunch of downvotes. Microsoft became the darling of the community, OR, in addition to embracing open source, they embraced voting ring tactics. These are two explanations I have, maybe there is another. Maybe my criticism really was obnoxious...
- coldtea 10y ago
  >Maybe my criticism really was obnoxious... Well, the "maybe in addition to embracing open source, they embraced voting ring tactics" part sure is.
- ocdtrekkie 10y ago
  Maybe it's just because yes, we all remember the 90s. But today is not necessarily the 90s. It was a lot more recent that Google was a relatively benevolent company, and we've all seen how that's changed. And the thing about open source projects, is just that. They're open source. If the wider community takes hold of them, there's not much Microsoft can do. Because then you just see a fork. You don't have to be a fan of Microsoft to simply appreciate the contribution to open software, as it is.
  - dragandj 10y ago
    The only catch in that perspective is that the language specification is open source, while Microsoft's compiler implementation is not. So, yes, we can edit those TeX documents they put on GitHub to our heart's delight.
    - vardump 10y ago
      https://github.com/Microsoft/checkedc-clang https://github.com/Microsoft/checkedc-clang https://github.com/Microsoft/checkedc-llvm https://github.com/Microsoft/checkedc-llvm Doesn't that look like an open source implementation? Or did I misunderstand something? However: > The compiler is not far enough along for programmers to "kick the tires" on Checked C. We do not have a installable version clang available yet. If you are really interested, you can build your own copy of the compiler:
johncolanduoni 10y ago
I don't think this project is an instance where this is an important aspect, but in general I do agree that some caution is warranted when using an open source project backed by a corporation (Microsoft or anyone else) in your code. As someone who was recently burned by what happened to RoboVM[1], I am now always careful to check for any CLAs that are required to contribute to open source projects before I decide to use them in anything important. The fact than you can fork is nice, but if the project is too reliant on the paid staff and doesn't have enough community surrounding it to survive getting dropped by its benefactor, you better hope you have the resources to maintain it yourself. This can happen even with no ill-intention involved, but the whole RoboVM debacle has convinced me that Embrace, Extend, Extinguish is not quite dead at Microsoft. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11503808 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11503808
- pjmlp 10y ago
  How many startups have been killed by other corporations, including Google, FB and friends? The RoboVM situation, while unfortunate is a lesson for people not to rely on proprietary tooling for portable projects. While I mostly code on JVM and .NET languages during the day, I use C++ for my hobby projects on mobile OSes. The reason being that C++ is an open standard and officially supported in all SDKs, no need for third party layers like RoboVM. A few similar lessons with my time spent on programming languages that weren't first party on platform SDKs, made me always choose first party languages, if I have decision power in the selection process.
  - johncolanduoni 10y ago
    > How many startups have been killed by other corporations, including Google, FB and friends? Yeah, that's why I said "Microsoft or anyone else". The only other time I mentioned Microsoft was in reference to RoboVM, which doesn't have much to do with Google or Facebook. > The RoboVM situation, while unfortunate is a lesson for people not to rely on proprietary tooling for portable projects. I agree, but the fact that RoboVM started off open source with a GPL licensed compiler was one of the main reasons I chose it. It's my own fault I didn't look to see how contributions were structured, or notice that very little code came from outside RoboVM, sure. That's why I'm advising caution in similar situations.

coldtea 10y ago

To put things in perspective, consider than from web browsers and languages, to their respective ill-fated mobile OS efforts, nothing Mozilla created has ever gotten more adoption than something MS created.

dragandj 10y ago
Only if we don't count Netscape and JavaScript. They put it in the browser, for better or for worse.
- coldtea 10y ago
  Why would we count Netscape and Javascript? We're talking about Mozilla. Netscape was a different company -- and besides we're discussing under the context of MS vs benevolent/FOSS entities.
freeduck 10y ago
According to w3counter ff and ie are neck to neck. https://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php https://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php Last month ff was ahead
- majewsky 10y ago
  It depends on the country. In Germany Firefox is actually the most popular browser according to usage statistics (even ahead of Chrome). Source: http://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/13007/umfrage/marktanteile-der-browser-bei-der-internetnutzung-in-deutschland-seit-2009/ http://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/13007/umfrage/... (German statistics office. Paywalled sadly, but you can see the first paragraph that describes Firefox market share at 52%.)
  - nhaehnle 10y ago
    Just FYI, Statista is a private company. You may be thinking of http://destatis.de/ http://destatis.de/, which is the homepage of the German federal office for statistics.

dragandj 10y ago

In reply to myself: The times are changing indeed. It seams that HN-ers started liking Microsoft. Whenever I post some concern, even if only mild, there is first a few upvotes, and then a bunch of downvotes. Microsoft became the darling of the community, OR, in addition to embracing open source, they embraced voting ring tactics. These are two explanations I have, maybe there is another. Maybe my criticism really was obnoxious...

coldtea 10y ago
>Maybe my criticism really was obnoxious... Well, the "maybe in addition to embracing open source, they embraced voting ring tactics" part sure is.
ocdtrekkie 10y ago
Maybe it's just because yes, we all remember the 90s. But today is not necessarily the 90s. It was a lot more recent that Google was a relatively benevolent company, and we've all seen how that's changed. And the thing about open source projects, is just that. They're open source. If the wider community takes hold of them, there's not much Microsoft can do. Because then you just see a fork. You don't have to be a fan of Microsoft to simply appreciate the contribution to open software, as it is.
- dragandj 10y ago
  The only catch in that perspective is that the language specification is open source, while Microsoft's compiler implementation is not. So, yes, we can edit those TeX documents they put on GitHub to our heart's delight.
  - vardump 10y ago
    https://github.com/Microsoft/checkedc-clang https://github.com/Microsoft/checkedc-clang https://github.com/Microsoft/checkedc-llvm https://github.com/Microsoft/checkedc-llvm Doesn't that look like an open source implementation? Or did I misunderstand something? However: > The compiler is not far enough along for programmers to "kick the tires" on Checked C. We do not have a installable version clang available yet. If you are really interested, you can build your own copy of the compiler:

johncolanduoni 10y ago

I don't think this project is an instance where this is an important aspect, but in general I do agree that some caution is warranted when using an open source project backed by a corporation (Microsoft or anyone else) in your code. As someone who was recently burned by what happened to RoboVM[1], I am now always careful to check for any CLAs that are required to contribute to open source projects before I decide to use them in anything important. The fact than you can fork is nice, but if the project is too reliant on the paid staff and doesn't have enough community surrounding it to survive getting dropped by its benefactor, you better hope you have the resources to maintain it yourself. This can happen even with no ill-intention involved, but the whole RoboVM debacle has convinced me that Embrace, Extend, Extinguish is not quite dead at Microsoft. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11503808 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11503808

pjmlp 10y ago
How many startups have been killed by other corporations, including Google, FB and friends? The RoboVM situation, while unfortunate is a lesson for people not to rely on proprietary tooling for portable projects. While I mostly code on JVM and .NET languages during the day, I use C++ for my hobby projects on mobile OSes. The reason being that C++ is an open standard and officially supported in all SDKs, no need for third party layers like RoboVM. A few similar lessons with my time spent on programming languages that weren't first party on platform SDKs, made me always choose first party languages, if I have decision power in the selection process.
- johncolanduoni 10y ago
  > How many startups have been killed by other corporations, including Google, FB and friends? Yeah, that's why I said "Microsoft or anyone else". The only other time I mentioned Microsoft was in reference to RoboVM, which doesn't have much to do with Google or Facebook. > The RoboVM situation, while unfortunate is a lesson for people not to rely on proprietary tooling for portable projects. I agree, but the fact that RoboVM started off open source with a GPL licensed compiler was one of the main reasons I chose it. It's my own fault I didn't look to see how contributions were structured, or notice that very little code came from outside RoboVM, sure. That's why I'm advising caution in similar situations.