5 ms·
I may be an out of touch old-timer but I still find it kinda sad and weird that Miguel and Nat, both of them heroes of mine in the early 2000s now work for Micr
by tpmx 5y ago
I may be an out of touch old-timer but I still find it kinda sad and weird that Miguel and Nat, both of them heroes of mine in the early 2000s now work for Microsoft.
- sneak 5y agoI think Carmack going to Facebook is the one that got me. Somehow Rob Pike and Guido at Google didn't, even though they are pretty close to Microsoft-equivalent these days.
- dleslie 5y agoid Software going to Bethesda.
- Hokusai 5y agoMost products are produced by a few corporations, monopolies are on the rise, that kills competition and variety but it allows to accumulate power to further increase control over the markets. That's the reason that antimonopoly legislation exists.
- mattl 5y agoWhich is now owned by Microsoft.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- tpmx 5y agoGoogle wasn't Microsoft-like when they joined.
- Izikiel43 5y agoIsn’t Guido working at microsoft now?
- amelius 5y agoWould you feel better if they worked for Apple? Microsoft is a much more open company than Apple, just look at the immense output of Microsoft Research over the years.
- tpmx 5y agoSince you specifically ask: I would probably respect them more if they had joined Apple. I think it's obvious that the bar is noticably higher there. Of course, this is all based on whether they actually thought about it strategically before deciding to go with C#. Perhaps they were thinking they'd get larger roles at Microsoft, perhaps they didn't think about it all and Microsoft was the most direct option due the the C# language choice.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- schoen 5y agoOn the other hand, Apple ended up finding more success with "embrace and extend" than Microsoft did. So much so that when you go to most free software conferences, well, back when in-person conferences still happened, most of the developers are running and writing free software on Apple's proprietary operating system.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- still_grokking 5y agoMicrosoft Research is great. But Microsoft Research isn't Microsoft.
- oneplane 5y agoApple's Swift OSS-side seems to be a whole lot better than .NET's OSS-side in some aspects, it'd be a neat comparison to make but I imagine the net result will be about the same when you take other aspects in to consideration.
- amyjess 5y agoMiguel and Nat have, ever since the early '00s, been enthusiastic supporters of Microsoft technology and have spent this century doing little other than enabling Microsoft tech to play well with open source. The takeaways from this are: 1. This is likely a lifelong dream for them. I'm not comfortable with shitting on people's lifelong dreams. 2. I definitely saw it coming. As soon as I saw Microsoft acquired Xamarin and retained both of them, the first thing that popped into my head was "this makes perfect sense". You can draw a straight line from their early work on Mono to their acquihire. 3. They are still spending their lives enabling Microsoft tech to play well with open source; the only difference is that Microsoft is now paying them to do it.
- tpmx 5y ago> Miguel and Nat have, ever since the early '00s, been enthusiastic supporters of Microsoft technology and have spent this century doing little other than enabling Microsoft tech to play well with open source. This seems like obvious Microsoft PR speech to me.
- jrm4 5y agoI think it's possible to find an effort both noble and foolish, which is exactly where I am here. I love that they thought they could shift Microsoft in a better direction, and hoped that they could succeed; but nevertheless was nearly 100% sure that it would never really happen.
- ethbr0 5y agoYou're nearly 100% certain that enabling Microsoft tech to play well with open source would never happen? ... It's already happened. And it's the only reason Azure isn't already dead, and that Microsoft's market share and stock price haven't cratered.
- jrm4 5y agoWe are working with very different definitions of "play well with open source;" Mine favors the ideals of free and open source software and doesn't really care much either way what happens to MS.
- chrisseaton 5y agoHaven't Miguel and Nat both based much of their careers around supporting Microsoft tech? They started Ximian - a support company for an implementation of Microsoft's .NET.
- amyjess 5y agoSlight correction: Ximian started out as a support company for GNOME. They didn't pivot to .NET until later.
- chrisseaton 5y agoI don't think that corrects anything I said?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- corpMaverick 5y agoI looked up to Miguel in the 1990s. But him and his father ended up supporting the current president of Mexico. Who is a demagogue with kleptomaniac tendencies.
- cassepipe 5y agoYeah well the whatever you think of the current president he did represent change in a country that has seen presidents from the same party for 70, and the president before him too. And the ones from the PAN weren't exactly great. At least that one seemed to be back by a democratic movement/hope. Can't blame them for that when you know the history of the country.
- corpMaverick 5y agoThe current president is the same as the PRI presidents that governed Mexico for 70 years. He just has a new label in a party that he owns.
- copperx 5y agoI think it's not smart to look down on someone for their political or religious views. There are many many issues in play. For example, how do you know he didn't support the president because of the change and ideals he represented, like many Mexicans did, and not his actual performance? Check you own biases.
- corpMaverick 5y agoThanks for the advice. I do try to respect political views. And I think even if I don agree with someone they often have redeeming qualities. I make two exceptions. Trump and Lopez Obrador.