4 ms·

Microsoft has done some very good things and some very bad things. I'll let everyone else point out the bad things because there seems to be plenty of that. I

by bargl 10y ago

Microsoft has done some very good things and some very bad things. I'll let everyone else point out the bad things because there seems to be plenty of that. I personally like the: Surface products, Typescript, C#/F#, .NET Core, Visual Studio Code, and the Hololens. These are all recently new developments for Microsoft that are really awesome. The fact that a lot of this has become open source is even better. You have to give Microsoft credit for one thing, they've shifted the company so much and that is impressive for a large company. I enjoy Azure but I understand some people's frustration with it so I exclude it from the list above, I get that it's contentious so I'm leaving it off.

johansch 10y ago
Have you personally tried the Hololens? They appear to have oversold the qualities of at least the first version.
- bargl 10y ago
  Yes and I recognize that there is a lot of room for improvement, but it's a really cool idea and I think it's the best Augmented Reality product on the market right now. If there is another one then let me know, because I'd love to see it. The biggest issue with Hololens is it's field of view.
  - johansch 10y ago
    I guess it all comes down to how expensive they'll be (at least for consumer applications). The $3000 cost for the new developer edition doesn't bode well, IMO.
- Eridrus 10y ago
  I tried one and was impressed. The limitations are real, and if they can't solve them and get the cost down it will remain a niche product for business, but I have no reason to believe that's the case.
- shmed 10y ago
  I personally tried them and was very impressed. Sure, field of view could be better, but as far as I know they are the only company that have figured out how to do inside out tracking 6 axis tracking. It's also a fully untethered experience, which put them ahead of pretty much all the competition in term of AR (in my opinion).
TuringTest 10y ago
Microsoft has a huge, huge intellectual capital in Microsoft Research. They have very interesting results and experimental ideas in programming languages and interaction design, and I'm sure they'll have most of it patented.
- runeks 10y ago
  > They have very interesting results and experimental ideas in programming languages and interaction design, and I'm sure they'll have most of it patented. That's the problem with Microsoft. They make their money by holding on to their IP (Windows), rather than spreading it around (like Google, with eg. Kubernetes), and I don't think this will work for anything like it has worked for Windows. For example, Microsoft didn't design the current default (dare I say) cloud runtime environment Kubernetes, because they would rather keep their technology within the Microsoft ecosystem, in order to attract customers to Windows (which is where they make their money). Google, on the other hand, is willing to let go of their IP (using the Kubernetes example), by donating it to a non-profit, and thus having it succeed because open standards always succeed in the end. It's just not possible for Microsoft to create some service within Azure, and have it become the "Windows of the Cloud". Companies just aren't willing to tie themselves to any particular vendor, and in that light Microsoft just doesn't seem that attractive.

by bargl 10y ago

johansch 10y ago

Have you personally tried the Hololens? They appear to have oversold the qualities of at least the first version.

bargl 10y ago
Yes and I recognize that there is a lot of room for improvement, but it's a really cool idea and I think it's the best Augmented Reality product on the market right now. If there is another one then let me know, because I'd love to see it. The biggest issue with Hololens is it's field of view.
- johansch 10y ago
  I guess it all comes down to how expensive they'll be (at least for consumer applications). The $3000 cost for the new developer edition doesn't bode well, IMO.
Eridrus 10y ago
I tried one and was impressed. The limitations are real, and if they can't solve them and get the cost down it will remain a niche product for business, but I have no reason to believe that's the case.
shmed 10y ago
I personally tried them and was very impressed. Sure, field of view could be better, but as far as I know they are the only company that have figured out how to do inside out tracking 6 axis tracking. It's also a fully untethered experience, which put them ahead of pretty much all the competition in term of AR (in my opinion).

TuringTest 10y ago

Microsoft has a huge, huge intellectual capital in Microsoft Research. They have very interesting results and experimental ideas in programming languages and interaction design, and I'm sure they'll have most of it patented.

runeks 10y ago
> They have very interesting results and experimental ideas in programming languages and interaction design, and I'm sure they'll have most of it patented. That's the problem with Microsoft. They make their money by holding on to their IP (Windows), rather than spreading it around (like Google, with eg. Kubernetes), and I don't think this will work for anything like it has worked for Windows. For example, Microsoft didn't design the current default (dare I say) cloud runtime environment Kubernetes, because they would rather keep their technology within the Microsoft ecosystem, in order to attract customers to Windows (which is where they make their money). Google, on the other hand, is willing to let go of their IP (using the Kubernetes example), by donating it to a non-profit, and thus having it succeed because open standards always succeed in the end. It's just not possible for Microsoft to create some service within Azure, and have it become the "Windows of the Cloud". Companies just aren't willing to tie themselves to any particular vendor, and in that light Microsoft just doesn't seem that attractive.