4 ms·

I'm not concerned about Node on Chakra necessarily -- its developers are probably smart enough to avoid this issue; I'm concerned about applications running on

I'm not concerned about Node on Chakra necessarily -- its developers are probably smart enough to avoid this issue; I'm concerned about applications running on Node on Chakra. Unless you avoid using __any__ non-standard behavior, Microsoft owns you. Using Chakra is risky. There is a very real possibility that Microsoft will make developers regret trusting them. The only possible payoff is that maybe you need one less app instance. Maybe. It's foolish to put you, your codebase, and your organization at risk for this.

chii 10y ago
Why can't you say the same for v8?
- KirinDave 10y ago
  Because Google is a company of unceasing virtue and "Don't be evil?" Or perhaps because many people have been conditioned to dislike anything Microsoft does without actually analyzing it's impact or relevance. Certainly it seems like there aren't many rational facts to thia person's argument. I very much agree that "non-standard behavior" in an open source product exists that could be directly replicated. One of the major benefits of open source licensing is to hedge against that behavior.
  - madmax96 10y ago
    So your counter-argument is this: > Or perhaps because many people have been conditioned to > dislike anything Microsoft does without actually > analyzing it's impact or relevance. > Certainly it seems like there aren't many rational facts > to thia person's argument. I could say the same thing about this comment.
    - KirinDave 10y ago
      So tell me, why is it bad for the industry? Why wasn't it bad when V8 came out and enabled node? Why is there a different standard you apply to Microsoft's open source efforts? Please, tell me.
      - madmax96 10y ago
        > why is it bad for the industry? I already explained how Microsoft has a history of violating people's trusts, and how an investment in Microsoft's technologies is therefore risky. > Why wasn't it bad when V8 came out and enabled node? This is off-topic: you don't know my opinion of V8 or Google. My opinion on V8, good or bad, also does not change the validity of my criticisms. > Why is there a different standard you apply to > Microsoft's open source efforts? You don't know me personally, so it's presumptive of you to assume I'm applying a standard unevenly. You have done nothing to address the criticisms of Microsoft, instead you have resorted to cheap red herrings -- a tell-tale sign of a lost argument. Until you decide to actually provide an argument of substance against what I've said, rather than arrogant name-calling and presumptive assumptions regarding my standards for open source, this conversation cannot serve any constructive purpose.
        KirinDave 10y ago
        Corporations are not people. Holding grudges against them as if they are people and not a social construct that changes over time makes 0 sense. They have new management that is doing a lot of great things. The number of bad things they do is going down. Many of their products are genuinely good now. They're oing out of their way to improve their support for the broader developer ecosystem. At this point, I "like" them a lot more than I like Apple or any of the hapless desktop Linux Distribution corporate governance bodies.
- madmax96 10y ago
  That's not related to the conversation at hand. Who said I like using v8?
  - KirinDave 10y ago
    Who asked what you like? That's irrelevant. You talk about "organizational risk"as if we don't live in a post-Sun world where Oracle genuinely believes APIs are patentable and the number of successful major open source projects without corporate sponsorships is vanishingly low. It's a world where a single assinine node developer with a trivial package on npm shut down the entire damn industry for days. A relationship with a fairly stable and increasingly developer friendly company like Microsoft seems very reasonable by comparison.
    - madmax96 10y ago
      > Who asked what you like? That's irrelevant. Parent did, when they asked: > Why can't you say the same for v8? My point was they did not know my opinion on the subject and to make an argument about my personal consistency in analysis (although this is off-topic) is impossible. Oracle's actions do change the validity of the criticisms against Microsoft. That conversation isn't directly related to this thread and is a weak distraction from Microsoft's history, a history that many reasonable people could claim is shameful. If that's the best that can be done to defend Microsoft, then it seems that it isn't trustworthy.
      - KirinDave 10y ago
        That's an odd reading. It looked to me like they were asking you why Chakra doesn't represent a risk similar to V8. And it does. But it's not a very high risk.

chii 10y ago

Why can't you say the same for v8?

KirinDave 10y ago
Because Google is a company of unceasing virtue and "Don't be evil?" Or perhaps because many people have been conditioned to dislike anything Microsoft does without actually analyzing it's impact or relevance. Certainly it seems like there aren't many rational facts to thia person's argument. I very much agree that "non-standard behavior" in an open source product exists that could be directly replicated. One of the major benefits of open source licensing is to hedge against that behavior.
- madmax96 10y ago
  So your counter-argument is this: > Or perhaps because many people have been conditioned to > dislike anything Microsoft does without actually > analyzing it's impact or relevance. > Certainly it seems like there aren't many rational facts > to thia person's argument. I could say the same thing about this comment.
  - KirinDave 10y ago
    So tell me, why is it bad for the industry? Why wasn't it bad when V8 came out and enabled node? Why is there a different standard you apply to Microsoft's open source efforts? Please, tell me.
    - madmax96 10y ago
      > why is it bad for the industry? I already explained how Microsoft has a history of violating people's trusts, and how an investment in Microsoft's technologies is therefore risky. > Why wasn't it bad when V8 came out and enabled node? This is off-topic: you don't know my opinion of V8 or Google. My opinion on V8, good or bad, also does not change the validity of my criticisms. > Why is there a different standard you apply to > Microsoft's open source efforts? You don't know me personally, so it's presumptive of you to assume I'm applying a standard unevenly. You have done nothing to address the criticisms of Microsoft, instead you have resorted to cheap red herrings -- a tell-tale sign of a lost argument. Until you decide to actually provide an argument of substance against what I've said, rather than arrogant name-calling and presumptive assumptions regarding my standards for open source, this conversation cannot serve any constructive purpose.
      - KirinDave 10y ago
        Corporations are not people. Holding grudges against them as if they are people and not a social construct that changes over time makes 0 sense. They have new management that is doing a lot of great things. The number of bad things they do is going down. Many of their products are genuinely good now. They're oing out of their way to improve their support for the broader developer ecosystem. At this point, I "like" them a lot more than I like Apple or any of the hapless desktop Linux Distribution corporate governance bodies.
madmax96 10y ago
That's not related to the conversation at hand. Who said I like using v8?
- KirinDave 10y ago
  Who asked what you like? That's irrelevant. You talk about "organizational risk"as if we don't live in a post-Sun world where Oracle genuinely believes APIs are patentable and the number of successful major open source projects without corporate sponsorships is vanishingly low. It's a world where a single assinine node developer with a trivial package on npm shut down the entire damn industry for days. A relationship with a fairly stable and increasingly developer friendly company like Microsoft seems very reasonable by comparison.
  - madmax96 10y ago
    > Who asked what you like? That's irrelevant. Parent did, when they asked: > Why can't you say the same for v8? My point was they did not know my opinion on the subject and to make an argument about my personal consistency in analysis (although this is off-topic) is impossible. Oracle's actions do change the validity of the criticisms against Microsoft. That conversation isn't directly related to this thread and is a weak distraction from Microsoft's history, a history that many reasonable people could claim is shameful. If that's the best that can be done to defend Microsoft, then it seems that it isn't trustworthy.
    - KirinDave 10y ago
      That's an odd reading. It looked to me like they were asking you why Chakra doesn't represent a risk similar to V8. And it does. But it's not a very high risk.