5 ms·

Google does the same or even worse with "open source" Android and chrome.

lucideer 6y ago
Exactly. And it's important to write articles like this about VSCode, Android, Chrome, and any others engaging in this (increasingly common) marketing approach.
- est31 6y ago
  And users can help by actually using VSCodium, LineageOS, Linux distro Chromium builds, non-Xcode clang, etc. instead of the proprietary variants.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Which the large majority chooses not to, so there you have it, the open source dream.
    - jefftk 6y ago
      On the other hand, Safari's WebKit being open source allowed Google to build Chrome on the same engine. Years later, Chrome's Blink engine being open source meant the same for Opera, Brave, and Edge. It is hard for individuals to run and maintain custom forks, but the benefits of open source in terms of preventing lock-in are substantial.
      - pjmlp 6y ago
        The same WebKit that now breaks the mobile Web and it being open source is completely irrelevant.
        jefftk 6y ago
        That Apple locks down iOS very tightly is a separate problem. WebKit on Mac continues to be usefully open source, and I believe performance improvements that Apple has made for Mac Safari have been incorporated into Firefox, Chrome, etc.
        pjmlp 6y ago
        Firefox doesn't use WebKit, and no it is not a separate problem because it shows how being FOSS isn't enough.
        jefftk 6y ago
        Firefox does not use WebKit (and at this point neither does anyone else), but they can look at patches to WebKit to understand how Apple improved Safari's performance. Because Apple produces the hardware, the OS, and the browser, the choices they make in the WebKit implementation are highly informative. > it shows how being FOSS isn't enough This is true for every app on iOS: even if you have the source code, you can't necessarily run a modified version, and so you're missing one of the main user freedoms that FOSS should guarantee. I wish Apple would rethink this, but Safari is still usefully open source.
        pjmlp 6y ago
        No they cannot unless they want to contaminate their development, as far as I recall the licenses aren't compatible. It is true for any commercial application with source code available since there are computers. If the user freedoms were of any value as you mention, WebKit and Bink would use copyleft licenses.
        jefftk 6y ago
        Just because you can't literally copy the code from one place to another doesn't mean you can't learn from it. I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is it's fine to learn what series of system calls they're making and look at their optimizations.

Exactly. And it's important to write articles like this about VSCode, Android, Chrome, and any others engaging in this (increasingly common) marketing approach.

est31 6y ago
And users can help by actually using VSCodium, LineageOS, Linux distro Chromium builds, non-Xcode clang, etc. instead of the proprietary variants.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Which the large majority chooses not to, so there you have it, the open source dream.
  - jefftk 6y ago
    On the other hand, Safari's WebKit being open source allowed Google to build Chrome on the same engine. Years later, Chrome's Blink engine being open source meant the same for Opera, Brave, and Edge. It is hard for individuals to run and maintain custom forks, but the benefits of open source in terms of preventing lock-in are substantial.
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      The same WebKit that now breaks the mobile Web and it being open source is completely irrelevant.
      - jefftk 6y ago
        That Apple locks down iOS very tightly is a separate problem. WebKit on Mac continues to be usefully open source, and I believe performance improvements that Apple has made for Mac Safari have been incorporated into Firefox, Chrome, etc.
        pjmlp 6y ago
        Firefox doesn't use WebKit, and no it is not a separate problem because it shows how being FOSS isn't enough.
        jefftk 6y ago
        Firefox does not use WebKit (and at this point neither does anyone else), but they can look at patches to WebKit to understand how Apple improved Safari's performance. Because Apple produces the hardware, the OS, and the browser, the choices they make in the WebKit implementation are highly informative. > it shows how being FOSS isn't enough This is true for every app on iOS: even if you have the source code, you can't necessarily run a modified version, and so you're missing one of the main user freedoms that FOSS should guarantee. I wish Apple would rethink this, but Safari is still usefully open source.
        pjmlp 6y ago
        No they cannot unless they want to contaminate their development, as far as I recall the licenses aren't compatible. It is true for any commercial application with source code available since there are computers. If the user freedoms were of any value as you mention, WebKit and Bink would use copyleft licenses.
        jefftk 6y ago
        Just because you can't literally copy the code from one place to another doesn't mean you can't learn from it. I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is it's fine to learn what series of system calls they're making and look at their optimizations.