5 ms·
> Microsoft, the open source company. I'm curious what makes you think they're an open source company. As far as I know, they have only open-sourced things tha
by olyjohn 7y ago
> Microsoft, the open source company.
I'm curious what makes you think they're an open source company. As far as I know, they have only open-sourced things that will attract developers back into their ecosystem. And only out of desperation that developers were leaving in droves. They only open-source things that benefit them. Have they ever open-sourced anything that benefited others before themselves?
- tracker1 7y agoConsidering everything surrounding .Net Core alone, is as significant as most "open source" companies tend to release. They've commit a lot of resources into open source. I wouldn't call them an open source company, but a software & services company. They've largely open-sourced what could be considered common place pieces with lots of competition, while keeping some secret sauce, and advancing their rental models (azure, o365, etc).
- moomin 7y agoI have bad news for you about every other open source company... Seriously, I’m not saying they’re paragons, but who the heck is? (Profitable companies only, please.) What is definitely the case, however, is that 10/20 years ago Microsoft would not even be writing that article, they’d have their own competitor, with weird lock-ins and missing features that was tightly integrated with some GUI panel in Visual Studio.
- bdcravens 7y agoIt doesn’t hurt that they own what for many years most considered “THE open source company” Can’t properly quantify (on mobile atm) but I’d venture to say they release as much or more than, say, Amazon