3 ms·

I think the real problem is that Microsoft worked so hard to obscure the relationship between the two via the branding and naming. It feels slimy and damages tr

by _bxg1 8y ago

I think the real problem is that Microsoft worked so hard to obscure the relationship between the two via the branding and naming. It feels slimy and damages trust. I'm a career JavaScript developer and I didn't know there was a separate, "truly open source" version. For comparison, look at Chrome vs Chromium. Similar project structure, but the branding and project communication are much better. Everybody (who would care) is readily aware of both versions and the difference between the two, and the fact that Chrome isn't fully open-source.

ocdtrekkie 8y ago
Arguably, there is no actual difference in code. Configuration of the package file is the only thing they change. I'm guessing the primary motivation for the license change is that the business people want to keep a strong hold specifically on the Visual Studio trademarks. Which to me, just says they would've been better off giving VSCode a different name.
- _bxg1 8y ago
  How do you know the only thing they change is the configuration? Unless you're internal to Microsoft, there's not really a way to know. Obscured telemetry has been a running problem with Microsoft in recent years, so it's understandable that people would be suspicious of hidden changes to an application advertised as open-source.
  - ocdtrekkie 8y ago
    I mean, decompiling the app is likely not hard. ILSpy is a thing, and you can even compare against a decompiled open source version. FUD about "obscured telemetry" isn't worth much here either: They specifically have a telemetry URL in the configuration file, and they not only specify that they set it in the thread, but they instruct you on how you can verify the configuration's contents on the proprietary version. Telemetry exists in VSCode, but the code is open source, and you can inspect it to your heart's content. Here: Here's how it works. When you build from the vscode repository, you can configure the resulting tool by customizing the product.json file. This file controls things like the Gallery endpoints, “Send-a-Smile” endpoints, telemetry endpoints, logos, names, and more. When we build Visual Studio Code, we do exactly this. We clone the vscode repository, we lay down a customized product.json that has Microsoft specific functionality (telemetry, gallery, logo, etc.), and then produce a build that we release under our license. And: You can look at the product.json that is installed with the Visual Studio Code product to see what we configure. Willing to bet if the product.json is easily visible in the compiled version, you can even adjust it to work like the open source version if you'd like, by removing the telemetry URL.
- jhanschoo 8y ago
  If arch packages are anything to go buy, I think the component that searches for vs code extensions might not be freely available.
recursive 8y ago
You mean kind of like the branding and naming of "Javascript", and how its relationship to java was intentionally obscured?
WalterGR 8y ago
I think the real problem is that Microsoft worked so hard to obscure the relationship between the two via the branding and naming. It feels slimy and damages trust. Did they? Was that their intent - to obscure? If Microsoft “worked so hard” then it should be easy to point to evidence. I'm a career JavaScript developer and I didn't know there was a separate, "truly open source" version. It kind of seems like because you didn’t know something, it implies that someone is engaging in intentional, malicious behavior.
- _bxg1 8y ago
  The whole point of the ticket is that it's unclear and ambiguous throughout their website. Also, the OSS version doesn't even have a different name. It's still just "VSCode". Compare this to Chromium which has a related-but-distinct name and related-but-distinct icon. The point I was trying to make is that I myself am immersed in the target community for this software, yet the messaging was not clear to me. I use React, I've worked with Electron, Atom is my go-to editor. I am VSCode's target user, and I did not remotely get the message. That suggests their messaging was either really bad, or intentionally misleading.

by _bxg1 8y ago

ocdtrekkie 8y ago

Arguably, there is no actual difference in code. Configuration of the package file is the only thing they change. I'm guessing the primary motivation for the license change is that the business people want to keep a strong hold specifically on the Visual Studio trademarks. Which to me, just says they would've been better off giving VSCode a different name.

_bxg1 8y ago
How do you know the only thing they change is the configuration? Unless you're internal to Microsoft, there's not really a way to know. Obscured telemetry has been a running problem with Microsoft in recent years, so it's understandable that people would be suspicious of hidden changes to an application advertised as open-source.
- ocdtrekkie 8y ago
  I mean, decompiling the app is likely not hard. ILSpy is a thing, and you can even compare against a decompiled open source version. FUD about "obscured telemetry" isn't worth much here either: They specifically have a telemetry URL in the configuration file, and they not only specify that they set it in the thread, but they instruct you on how you can verify the configuration's contents on the proprietary version. Telemetry exists in VSCode, but the code is open source, and you can inspect it to your heart's content. Here: Here's how it works. When you build from the vscode repository, you can configure the resulting tool by customizing the product.json file. This file controls things like the Gallery endpoints, “Send-a-Smile” endpoints, telemetry endpoints, logos, names, and more. When we build Visual Studio Code, we do exactly this. We clone the vscode repository, we lay down a customized product.json that has Microsoft specific functionality (telemetry, gallery, logo, etc.), and then produce a build that we release under our license. And: You can look at the product.json that is installed with the Visual Studio Code product to see what we configure. Willing to bet if the product.json is easily visible in the compiled version, you can even adjust it to work like the open source version if you'd like, by removing the telemetry URL.
jhanschoo 8y ago
If arch packages are anything to go buy, I think the component that searches for vs code extensions might not be freely available.

recursive 8y ago

You mean kind of like the branding and naming of "Javascript", and how its relationship to java was intentionally obscured?

WalterGR 8y ago

I think the real problem is that Microsoft worked so hard to obscure the relationship between the two via the branding and naming. It feels slimy and damages trust. Did they? Was that their intent - to obscure? If Microsoft “worked so hard” then it should be easy to point to evidence. I'm a career JavaScript developer and I didn't know there was a separate, "truly open source" version. It kind of seems like because you didn’t know something, it implies that someone is engaging in intentional, malicious behavior.

_bxg1 8y ago
The whole point of the ticket is that it's unclear and ambiguous throughout their website. Also, the OSS version doesn't even have a different name. It's still just "VSCode". Compare this to Chromium which has a related-but-distinct name and related-but-distinct icon. The point I was trying to make is that I myself am immersed in the target community for this software, yet the messaging was not clear to me. I use React, I've worked with Electron, Atom is my go-to editor. I am VSCode's target user, and I did not remotely get the message. That suggests their messaging was either really bad, or intentionally misleading.