4 ms·
They are both incredibly talented. I've watched dozens of hours of them programming and really enjoy their streams. They are also both kind of assholes. Some p
by eco 4y ago
They are both incredibly talented. I've watched dozens of hours of them programming and really enjoy their streams.
They are also both kind of assholes. Some people love that about them. I've certainly found myself really enjoying many of their rants.
Casey was pleasant enough in the github thread but he was less generous in his streams about this. He really did not like being talked down to (who would?) and spent a long time mocking them. They clearly did not know who Casey was or they probably wouldn't have tried to explain his concerns away (especially when they were wrong).
If you don't see arrogance on Casey's side though then I suspect you haven't watched enough of his streams. While he's very humble and will go out of his way to say when he doesn't know something, he's very arrogant in the subjects he knows well and will very openly mock anyone who isn't doing things as well as he expects them to (in an abstract sense, he doesn't really target individuals).
I find his attitude so frustrating sometimes because he clearly loves teaching and I can't think of another single programmer more generous with their time and knowledge but at the same time he cannot abide anyone not at his level.
I'm a fan of Casey and I really like Windows Terminal (compared to what we had before especially). This whole thing was not a good look for either side but on the plus side, Windows Terminal is now closer to being at Casey's level so I guess he ultimately won. I just wish instead he'd tried to contribute his ideas to Windows Terminal instead of spending hours programming his own toy terminal whose whole existence was to mock them. I don't think he has it in him to lower himself to that though.
- rstat1 4y agoTo be fair, he did try to contribute. One of the posts in the original Github thread was a reasonably detailed explanation of how to do what he was proposing, and it was dismissed as a "PHD level deep dive in to text rendering" or something similar. I tend to agree with you on about how the 2 of them choose to communicate their opinions at times, but honestly in this case I think it was fully warranted.
- ripley12 4y agoIt's gone on for almost a year now. Some initial response was warranted but IMO continuing to bring this up is reflecting poorly on Casey at this point.
- AlchemistCamp 4y agoDid MS every truly apologize and try to make amends? Being dismissive and condescending to someone with more domain expertise who is trying to help you, a trillion dollar company, for free, is a lot.
- routerl 4y agoThey're both new versions of an ancient archetype of IT. When they are correct, it seems that their priority is being correct, rather than productively informing others. This attitude ignores a fundamental truth of any industry; "perfect" is the enemy of "finished", and if I can get to "good enough to ship" without having smug perfectionists on my team, then I won't have them on my team. The above reasoning is altered if the smug perfectionist is a totally unique and unreplaceable talent, or if the project truly requires a degree of perfectionism (e.g. medical devices, avionics). But that's... largely not what Blow and Casey talk about... Given that, my response to these guys is to paraphrase Mark Twain: sorry I wrote a complicated program, I didn't have time to write a simple one.
- darepublic 4y agoWhy is it wrong to spend hours programming something to show up a big corp that refuses to take steps to improve its own products?