5 ms·

Ex office dev here. Actual dev work is done on i9 workstations running 64 gb of ram, and usually located very near an Azure data center, regardless of where the

Ex office dev here. Actual dev work is done on i9 workstations running 64 gb of ram, and usually located very near an Azure data center, regardless of where the dev works. The result is that it's fast for us. Everyone knows that it runs like poop, but there are other priorities, and no performance regression tests.

foolproofplan 5y ago
They know about performance issues don't dont want to fix or introduce performance tests? Nice.
- toyg 5y ago
  It's Microsoft. Corporations of that size don't really have to worry about technical details that much - the competition can eat their lunch here and there and they'll still survive. They know they can crush any small fish any time. I mean, look at this very thread: Slack effectively invented this "modern IRC" bullshit, but still, when MS decided they had to have an answer, they cloned it and effectively imposed it to millions of users, no matter how inferior a product it might have been - in just a few years. They can throw hundreds of millions in the fire and they'll still be okay. No need to rush for a few perf tickets...
  - xtracto 5y ago
    Moreover, teams target audience is not people in HN. My wife works for a huge transnational manufacturing company (like Foxconn) which not long ago migrated from Google cloud to all-things-Microsoft. I cannot imagine the amount of win for the SDR that won MS that account. Now, teams allow IT drones to tick the 'online chat' checkbox, its (crappily) integrated with Office365 and basically does most of what the Financial, HR, Business, operations and Sales department need. Nobody gets fired for buying Microsoft. That's the target audience. And that audience only needs 'good enough ' software. And, being it IT, what better than computers that keep breaking, so that their job is guaranteed.
    - Miiko 5y ago
      > Moreover, teams target audience is not people in HN. Yep. I believe, the key in Microsoft success was Bill Gates realizing a simple truth: - Users of office software are not those who decide to buy it, that's their manager who are. From the very beginning, Microsoft product had all boxes checked, were very easy to install and to do trivial things with them. Being convenient to do some real work? Very low on priority list.
      - pjmlp 5y ago
        I partially disagree, VB pre-NET and .NET tooling are only outperformed by Delphi, C++ Builder and Java. Anything else doesn't really match being convenient to do some real work. The UNIXy competition, with exception of Java, doesn't really get the "Developers" mantra.
        hackerfromthefu 5y ago
        I agree, Delphi and C++ Builder alumni here! However I find .NET to be the only really good things about modern Microsoft. Even Windows itself has so many anti-features these days that I pity the average user who can't lock it down.
        toyg 5y ago
        The thing is that we're really talking about different types of developers. One type of developer wants to get shit done as quickly and painlessly as possible, so they can clock out and do something else. That's the traditional MS crowd. Another type of developer likes to mess with stuff "just because". For him (because it's a him), excessive complexity is a value, since it provides "rep" once mastered. This is the unixy crowd, trained by a lifetime messing with Linux just to boot up - that's also where I come from, before people accuse me of disparaging people. MS steered hard towards that crowd with Nadella because they had lost them for a generation. That didn't necessarily result in a productivity increase for the first crowd, or even in general. The thing is that really the "developers" mantras for these two crowds, are very different.
- tinus_hn 5y ago
  They sell features. Businesses don’t really care about hard to quantify things like performance.
dx034 5y ago
Interesting, so all development is done on remotely on VDI or RDP instead of local machines?
soapboxrocket 5y ago
So two questions: 1) what other priorities? 2) has anyone that worked on teams actually used it? It has one of the worst UX's ever.

foolproofplan 5y ago

They know about performance issues don't dont want to fix or introduce performance tests? Nice.

toyg 5y ago
It's Microsoft. Corporations of that size don't really have to worry about technical details that much - the competition can eat their lunch here and there and they'll still survive. They know they can crush any small fish any time. I mean, look at this very thread: Slack effectively invented this "modern IRC" bullshit, but still, when MS decided they had to have an answer, they cloned it and effectively imposed it to millions of users, no matter how inferior a product it might have been - in just a few years. They can throw hundreds of millions in the fire and they'll still be okay. No need to rush for a few perf tickets...
- xtracto 5y ago
  Moreover, teams target audience is not people in HN. My wife works for a huge transnational manufacturing company (like Foxconn) which not long ago migrated from Google cloud to all-things-Microsoft. I cannot imagine the amount of win for the SDR that won MS that account. Now, teams allow IT drones to tick the 'online chat' checkbox, its (crappily) integrated with Office365 and basically does most of what the Financial, HR, Business, operations and Sales department need. Nobody gets fired for buying Microsoft. That's the target audience. And that audience only needs 'good enough ' software. And, being it IT, what better than computers that keep breaking, so that their job is guaranteed.
  - Miiko 5y ago
    > Moreover, teams target audience is not people in HN. Yep. I believe, the key in Microsoft success was Bill Gates realizing a simple truth: - Users of office software are not those who decide to buy it, that's their manager who are. From the very beginning, Microsoft product had all boxes checked, were very easy to install and to do trivial things with them. Being convenient to do some real work? Very low on priority list.
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      I partially disagree, VB pre-NET and .NET tooling are only outperformed by Delphi, C++ Builder and Java. Anything else doesn't really match being convenient to do some real work. The UNIXy competition, with exception of Java, doesn't really get the "Developers" mantra.
      - hackerfromthefu 5y ago
        I agree, Delphi and C++ Builder alumni here! However I find .NET to be the only really good things about modern Microsoft. Even Windows itself has so many anti-features these days that I pity the average user who can't lock it down.
      - toyg 5y ago
        The thing is that we're really talking about different types of developers. One type of developer wants to get shit done as quickly and painlessly as possible, so they can clock out and do something else. That's the traditional MS crowd. Another type of developer likes to mess with stuff "just because". For him (because it's a him), excessive complexity is a value, since it provides "rep" once mastered. This is the unixy crowd, trained by a lifetime messing with Linux just to boot up - that's also where I come from, before people accuse me of disparaging people. MS steered hard towards that crowd with Nadella because they had lost them for a generation. That didn't necessarily result in a productivity increase for the first crowd, or even in general. The thing is that really the "developers" mantras for these two crowds, are very different.
tinus_hn 5y ago
They sell features. Businesses don’t really care about hard to quantify things like performance.

dx034 5y ago

Interesting, so all development is done on remotely on VDI or RDP instead of local machines?

soapboxrocket 5y ago

So two questions: 1) what other priorities? 2) has anyone that worked on teams actually used it? It has one of the worst UX's ever.