5 ms·
They're not really different though. People's memory is short. I've had access to MSFT source code before under shared source apart from the CSPs suspiciously,
by cjsuk 9y ago
They're not really different though.
People's memory is short. I've had access to MSFT source code before under shared source apart from the CSPs suspiciously, I've had symbol server around for years and been able to pop into framework code, then there's stuff like this: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc749640.aspx https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc749640.aspx - not even counting the amount of source coming from MSR etc.
My criticism is not dogma, it's the regression in all the other areas that's the big problem. I appreciate not having to wade through treacle to get my job done. This has got considerably worse in the last 3-4 years as the platform sort of falls to pieces on a regular basis.
Do you remember when server, dev tools, OS and platform all dropped at the same time? That was peak quality. What we have now is the diametric opposite. We have no direction with .Net Core other than all over the place, unmaintained crap falling out everywhere. It's hell. It's really difficult to build and manage a medium to large sized project when someone is smashing all the pieces off the board once a month. And also when you have to raise a defect with one of their products it is closed, ignored or via partner support "here's a registry fix you have to deploy to 2000 disparate companies to fix our product because we removed a UI option" type outcomes.
The good things in life are where I start a project and run it to completion and the tools and frameworks perform as intended. That's not there any more. Things like python, golang and even Java offer better proposition. Even the tooling quality, such as Visual Studio 2017, we have to unconfigure a lot of features to make it stable (like CodeLens for example).
I wouldn't even consider picking it as a platform to build a new project on now because of the time, rewrite and cost risk.
What you see is marketing and front. What I see and oversee is a large team of people fighting this every day.
- Quarrelsome 9y agoSorry we're now discussing completely different things and you acknowledge that they are "different" in regards to their lack of "peak quality". You are not arguing in good faith. Check yourself.
- cjsuk 9y agoI disagree. I am merely relaying experience.
- thanksgiving 9y agoI agree with you. I think most free software advocates are far too nice to say anything bad about people. Just look at dot net and how it is now "open source". Well, except it isn't because the dot net special interest group doesn't have the source code for tooling they need in order to meet fedora packaging guidelines. This is supposed to be the easy part because from what I understand they rewrote everything for .NET core. I was a big fan of dot net core and now I warn everyone of it. It is best to just avoid Microsoft in many cases.
- Quarrelsome 9y agoTo divert from the debate on their position on OSS. You started okay about Rotor but then went off on a rant. You're not interested in debating you just want to talk about how bad Microsoft are. I am stating they've changed somewhat since the Bill Gates days. Is my position really so fucking radical that it deserves your tangential rant about registry settings? Peak quality != OSS stance.
- sumfag 9y agoNo, you weren't. Gonna have to agree with your parent commenter that they are actively user-hostile and consumer-hostile, in addition to FOSS-hostile, even moreso than ever before for all the reasons stated above. Your comment right here shows me you have little to no argument left in you, despite your "good faith". I advise you check yourself Quarrelsome, since you devalued your own argument before it even got started. (fitting username)
- Quarrelsome 9y agoSo the quality of the tool chain has everything to do with their attitude to open source software and whether they can be assumed to be a friend or enemy of open source software? We began couching the argument about the company and its businesses practices and we ended on the implementation detail of needing to change a registry setting in a windows deployment. If that isn't tangential muddying of the waters, what is? I want to discuss things to derive truth but my conversational partner just wants to force the Microsoft == bad equation. THAT is arguing in poor faith and not being interested in the conversation and the revelation of truth. That is forcing a pre-destined conclusion on the conversation and a requirement for re-checking of self. My argument is merely that there _is_ a difference. Its been over twenty years, surely the passage of time generates _some_ difference. My position is far from radical nor am I excusing Microsoft from anything but merely stating they have a more positive stance on OSS today than they did during the Gates era.
- sumfag 9y agoNo, the quality of the toolchain is emblematic of their attitudes towards FOSS. There is a difference, totally, their sinking ship needs a little help to stay afloat and OSS is that buoy IMO.
- Quarrelsome 9y agosounds to me like you've already made your mind up about everything about them. You're not commenting, you're soap boxing.
- giancarlostoro 9y agoand yet they also have things like this: https://github.com/dotnet/core/blob/master/LICENSE.TXT https://github.com/dotnet/core/blob/master/LICENSE.TXT https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode/blob/master/LICENSE.txt https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode/blob/master/LICENSE.txt Can't really say nothing's changed if a lot has. I personally believe they need to refine their OS department, clearly that side of the company needs serious change. I say this after having heard of all the oddities from Windows 10 (their latest and current OS) and how awful it is to remove software from Windows 10.
- cjsuk 9y agoThat's only there because they know no one can fork and commit to maintain a codebase that size. Same reason no one forked Linux. They still have 100% control over it.
- giancarlostoro 9y agohttps://github.com/flagello/Essence https://github.com/flagello/Essence That's one fork of VS Code. Not sure how to find projects implementing .NET Core I do know Mono is implementing code from .NET Core though see: http://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/dotnet-integration/ http://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/dotnet-integrati...
- justinclift 9y agoThat Essence repo hasn't received any new commits in months. Maybe not a good example of a successful fork?
- bousaid 9y agoI’m sorry but you are incredibly ignorant. There’s a huge focus on customer feedback and “customer obsession” in the company now. And that’s coming from Satya himself. I’m sure what are talking about was true in the past (and it seems like you experienced a lot) but things really have changed - not completely of course, Microsoft is so huge that it’ll take a while. You should just ask some people who work there;)
- cjsuk 9y agoWhy does no one listen to customers then? Ignored on privacy. Ignored on bugs. Ignored on product direction. That's not feedback or customer obsession, that's lip service. And we pay for the software so we can only vote with our feet and on the way help other people to avoid the same pitfalls.
- flyinghamster 9y agoGiven the loud backlash against Microsoft's telemetry practices and MS's doubling down, I couldn't agree less. The ad hominem was uncalled for.
- maxxxxx 9y ago.NET Core also made me doubt their efforts. It looked good at the start but it has turned into a very confusing experience. There seems to be no direction.