5 ms·

> I don't know about any other company that is large, successful, focuses on the enterprise and absolutely behind OSS. Doesnt Microsoft tick all those boxes? E

> I don't know about any other company that is large, successful, focuses on the enterprise and absolutely behind OSS. Doesnt Microsoft tick all those boxes? Even if they aren't exclusively an open source company, they are "absolutely behind OSS" if you go by how much open source code they have contributed.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
techntoke 8y ago
Mostly useless projects though for people that want speed and Linux-native open source.
solarkraft 8y ago
Meh. They have a bad reputation due to calling open word source software cancer the new windows business model. Also, while their engineers are certainly smart, their software seems very crusty (the down side of infinite backwards compatibility) and usually doesn't play well at all with existing open source software. Thus: Mostly useless.
- rincebrain 8y ago
  Amusingly, they're damned both ways at this point, since many of the Windows 10 complaints have, in fact, been breaks in backward compatibility.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- thatcloudguy 8y ago
  The early 2000s called and would like their objection back. Microsoft isn't that same company any more and haven't been for a long time. Sure, some of their technology is pretty awful but they definitely changed their tune around OSS.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - jhasse 8y ago
    So we can merge exFAT support into the Kernel now? Microsoft loves Linux, right?
emilsedgh 8y ago
How on earth is Microsoft "absolutely" behind OSS? Which of their main products is Open Source? Windows? Office? SQL Server? Azure? Exchange? What exactly makes Microsoft a company "absolutely behind OSS?" Their stupid boot loader still ignores any other operating system for god's sake. Kudos to people at Microsoft's Marketing and "developer relations" department who won the hearts of developers by allowing TypeScript and VSCode to be FOSS. Suddenly MS is "Absolutely behind OSS".
- eksemplar 8y ago
  I work in the public sector in Denmark, and we’ve delt a lot with both IBM and Microsoft over the past 25 years. Microsoft has been one of our best partners, including for the open source software we run, especially since Azure became their mission. IBM has been one of the worst, so bad that I’d dread making any deals with them ever again. I wouldn’t say MS is fully behind OSS though, they contribute a lot these years, but their main goal is still to sell you Azure. I think they won the hearts and minds with .Net core though, I mean VSC is the best ide and typescript is typescript, but the future of a lot of web programming lies within .Net core.
  - leeman2016 8y ago
    > the future of a lot of web programming lies within .Net core How is that, really?
    - eksemplar 8y ago
      How is it not? I mean, we’re a muniplacity, we operate around 500 IT systems, that are all moving toward becoming web apps in some form. The core tech behind these is in 95% of the cases either .Net or JAVA. Our in-house development has moved from .Net to JavaScript, mainly because we’re small and if our front end had to be JS then our backend might as well be, but now you have something like Blazor.net emerging, allowing for full stack C#, of course we’re going that route. I didn’t say all, but I frankly think it’s obvious that .Net will play a big part of web development future, considering how big a part it already plays today and considering how Microsoft is moving it forward in all the right ways.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

techntoke 8y ago

Mostly useless projects though for people that want speed and Linux-native open source.

solarkraft 8y ago

Meh. They have a bad reputation due to calling open word source software cancer the new windows business model. Also, while their engineers are certainly smart, their software seems very crusty (the down side of infinite backwards compatibility) and usually doesn't play well at all with existing open source software. Thus: Mostly useless.

rincebrain 8y ago
Amusingly, they're damned both ways at this point, since many of the Windows 10 complaints have, in fact, been breaks in backward compatibility.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
thatcloudguy 8y ago
The early 2000s called and would like their objection back. Microsoft isn't that same company any more and haven't been for a long time. Sure, some of their technology is pretty awful but they definitely changed their tune around OSS.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- jhasse 8y ago
  So we can merge exFAT support into the Kernel now? Microsoft loves Linux, right?

emilsedgh 8y ago

How on earth is Microsoft "absolutely" behind OSS? Which of their main products is Open Source? Windows? Office? SQL Server? Azure? Exchange? What exactly makes Microsoft a company "absolutely behind OSS?" Their stupid boot loader still ignores any other operating system for god's sake. Kudos to people at Microsoft's Marketing and "developer relations" department who won the hearts of developers by allowing TypeScript and VSCode to be FOSS. Suddenly MS is "Absolutely behind OSS".

eksemplar 8y ago
I work in the public sector in Denmark, and we’ve delt a lot with both IBM and Microsoft over the past 25 years. Microsoft has been one of our best partners, including for the open source software we run, especially since Azure became their mission. IBM has been one of the worst, so bad that I’d dread making any deals with them ever again. I wouldn’t say MS is fully behind OSS though, they contribute a lot these years, but their main goal is still to sell you Azure. I think they won the hearts and minds with .Net core though, I mean VSC is the best ide and typescript is typescript, but the future of a lot of web programming lies within .Net core.
- leeman2016 8y ago
  > the future of a lot of web programming lies within .Net core How is that, really?
  - eksemplar 8y ago
    How is it not? I mean, we’re a muniplacity, we operate around 500 IT systems, that are all moving toward becoming web apps in some form. The core tech behind these is in 95% of the cases either .Net or JAVA. Our in-house development has moved from .Net to JavaScript, mainly because we’re small and if our front end had to be JS then our backend might as well be, but now you have something like Blazor.net emerging, allowing for full stack C#, of course we’re going that route. I didn’t say all, but I frankly think it’s obvious that .Net will play a big part of web development future, considering how big a part it already plays today and considering how Microsoft is moving it forward in all the right ways.