30 ms·

Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

• Shadonototra 4y ago
  yesterday it was the debugger, then the hotreload, now it's the language server people are still blind
  • bogwog 4y ago
    Accepting the truth is harder than learning a new language/ecosystem. Some people love .NET/C# so much that they're willing to pay a hefty premium to stick with it (which is perfectly fine) But some of those people are also coming out and doing mental gymnastics to defend this decision as something other than what is actually is: an opportunistic price hike (and likely, the first of many)
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
• WalterGR 4y ago
  Is Microsoft un-open-sourcing or un-free-softwaring existing code?
  • bzxcvbn 4y ago
    Nope. They're focusing their effort on merging the code bases needed to support VS and VSCode's C#.
  • tempodox 4y ago
    No, they will offer a closed-source sibling product.
    • exyi 4y ago
      And most likely deprecate support for the open Language server, as they did with Pylance/Jedi...
      • WalterGR 4y ago
        What do you mean by "deprecate support"? Do you mean stop developing a project that's open source / free software?
        • exyi 4y ago
          They did remove support for Jedi language server in their Python extension. Sure, you can fork it, but nobody will actually use it, since their extension is also free and also looks open. And I didn't find any extension which does that :/
          • dragonwriter 4y ago
            > They did remove support for Jedi language server in their Python extension. No, they just switched the default to Pylance. Jedi is still a supported option.
  • Ygg2 4y ago
    Not yet. Remember, lobotomized frogs prefer slow cooking. Anyway. MSFT is adding closed source version of Omnislash in parallel to the open source one, and offering a choice which to pick. Give it a few years. They will sunset the OSS, because of lack of interest. Maybe they will even slap on a price.
• rvz 4y ago
  • bmitc 4y ago
    Why does Microsoft get labeled like this while Apple, one of the most brutally closed off companies, is loved by developers? Microsoft is very responsive on GitHub issues I have filed, and I have benefited a lot from their open source offerings, namely VS Code and F#.
    • ig-88ms 4y ago
      Because people are still living in the 90s and even the best developers just love to gobble up Apple's propaganda bullshit.
      • ozim 4y ago
        I don't think there is that much devs doing actual work in Apple ecosystem - they use Macbooks but not Swift or Objective-C and no one is using XCode for their day 2 day development. Just check StackOverflow 2021 survey - Swift is like 5%
      • happymellon 4y ago
        Apple is absolutely awful. That doesn't make Microsoft's double-talk okay, Apple never pretended to :heart: opensource.
        • DeathArrow 4y ago
          >Apple never pretended to :heart: opensource. But they did. They claimed part of Mac OS, Darwin, is open source. Like Google like to brag about Android being Open Source even if you have to put a ton of proprietary software on top of the open source parts to make it usable.
          • happymellon 4y ago
            Claiming that part of Darwin is opensource, which it was, is not quite the same thing as claiming to love opensource, and yet slowly close it up once you have mindshare like with VSCode. Apple didn't take ownership and then start closing CUPS, but they have also never pretended to be a friend of OpenSouce. They haven't produced anything opensource since then. There have been a couple of projects, like their rebranding of KHTML that suited their purposes but they never donated time or money back, or even pretended to help upstream. If you look at the Asahi Linux on M processors, Apple don't hinder and may have arguably done things in a way to not block them but they certainly have not helped or even claimed that it was a good thing.
• lnxg33k1 4y ago
  I love C#, had a job doing it on Mono and really enjoyed working on it, but never trusted to work on anything personal with it, in order to avoid being stuck depending on Microsoft since they bought Xamarin, and I resisted even when they published ASP.Net Core on github, really think that microsoft is un-trustable
  • exyi 4y ago
    I'd say that most corporate-backed platforms will have similar issues. The corporations simply have other interests than the community (next quarter profit + control / long term stability + independence). Only way to keep them from doing this is pushing back whenever they try. MS did that with Pylance, it went well and now they are trying again with C#
    • lnxg33k1 4y ago
      The thing is that I am not sure how to fight back if not by avoiding corporate tools completely, like they can always change policy by changing a CEO, then what? If you have a product you can just get the hit, what can you do?
  • bogwog 4y ago
    > really think that microsoft is un-trustable The only thing you can trust Microsoft on is their commitment to fuck over their customers and partners.
• egeozcan 4y ago
  Such a great, pragmatic, versatile programming language (C#), having a great FP side-kick (F#) that can be used next to it, and years of corporate experience and a great ecosystem of closed and open-source libraries, 3rd party tooling that really brings the experience to another level (LINQPad, Rider, Resharper)... .NET could stay closed source and everyone would happily keep using it, of course with very limited open-source adoption. Now they are being "shady" (For the lack of a better word, English is not my mother tongue. I'm not trying to be hostile to many good people working at Microsoft but this is how the signals the whole organization gives are interpreted. I hugely respect your work still), and that is putting doubts in the minds of their hardcore followers.
  • klysm 4y ago
    If it was closed I certainly wouldn’t choose it for something new.
• Aloha 4y ago
  I'm somewhat confused what's going on here.
  • _old_dude_ 4y ago
    Microsoft is starting to port VS studio (IntelliSense) which is proprietary to VS code which is opensource. Current C# plugin (Omnisharp) is opensource, so they announce that it will be replaced by a closed source selector that let you choose the opensource or the proprietary plugin with the proprietary as default. It's Embrace, Extend, Extinguish just in front of our eyes, so opensource people are pissed.
    • Lio 4y ago
      Worth pointing out that VS Code is not really open source. The builds are proprietary. It’s based on an open source core but the builds can include anything that Microsoft thinks will be commercially useful to it.
      • foepys 4y ago
        There is a libre version of VS Code but it is missing features like access to the official extension marketplace. https://github.com/VSCodium/vscodium https://github.com/VSCodium/vscodium
        • nyanpasu64 4y ago
          And all of Microsoft's proprietary extensions look for official proprietary VS Code and refuse to run on open-source builds lacking Microsoft's private key.
        • exyi 4y ago
          It works reasonably well though, most extensions are in the libre open-vsx.org gallery. Only problem for me is the missing .NET debugger...
          • 4y ago
• DeathArrow 4y ago
  .NET is open. You can find its source on Github. The .NET platform being open doesn't mean everything targeting the .NET platform is open, too.
  • exyi 4y ago
    You could however reasonably expect that core tools like debugger and LSP will be open too.
    • jayd16 4y ago
      Maybe? These are just implementations, right? Others will still be able to build tools? JetBrains isn't pushed out by this, is it? Java flight recorder, for example, wasn't always open source. While it's not ideal, I'm not sure the idea of closed source tools in an open language is all that unheard of.
      • bayesian_horse 4y ago
        Key tools of the platform not being open means the platform is either not open or not useable, take your pick.
        • deleted 4y ago
          [deleted]
        • phendrenad2 4y ago
          This is like saying PCs aren't open because most people use Windows.
          • bayesian_horse 4y ago
            PCs have tons of closed source firmware and BIOS. So no, PCs aren't open! Windows isn't open. But you could argue there are open alternatives to Windows.
  • 4y ago
• chenzhekl 4y ago
  This is exactly the same as what MS did for the Python extension when the open-source LSP was replaced by the proprietary Pylance. I get the feeling that MS becomes more and more likes Google. For example, on Android, the core experience is provided by GMS while the AOSP is provided as an open-source core. In terms of VSCode, the core editor is free and open-source, but some key experience is baked by proprietary components (e.g., Remote plugins, Pylance, etc.). And the trending is that more and more plugins which are controlled by MS are moving towards to a mixture of open-source code and proprietary components.
  • pjmlp 4y ago
    It appears offering free beer forever isn't sustainable, even when one has deep pockets, go figure.
    • mhh__ 4y ago
      Sustainable and optimal are different. For a company like Microsoft at least.
      • pjmlp 4y ago
        Shareware and Public Domain are back with a different name, many still haven't gotten it.
    • throwaway2048 4y ago
      I somehow doubt that Microsoft has any pressing need to return profits from the python LSP
      • pjmlp 4y ago
        It gets to share the same code with Visual Studio proper.
  • thejosh 4y ago
    Yep, they saw no real backlash to doing this for the Python one, then decided to do it here as well.
• tamrix 4y ago
  Didn't they hire the guy that made omnisharp anyway?
  • dustinmoris 4y ago
    Yes, that was Embrace, we're already past Extend and now entered Extinguish.
• oleksandr_kot 4y ago
  I've been using Omnisharp-VsCode extension for years on my daily job. It's far from ideal, especially the initial setup experience. I think here's what's going on: It appears VS Code is Microsoft's main IDE and C# is the main language. Not surprised they decided to obtain more control over the integration to improve the experience. In terms of management, it's always easier to cut all the external dependencies (community) and "just do it", even though it's absolutely against the open source spirit and definitely will hurt their community relationships and the trust. Can't say the decision is an absolute evil.
  • ripperdoc 4y ago
    I can echo this, while doing its job most of the time, Omnisharp has been one of the least stable parts of my VS Code C# experience (the least stable as usual being anything relating to Unity ;) ). Issues like runaway compiler threads, slow response times, OmniSharp frequently losing the mono-path and requires restart (this is some config issue and interaction with Unity, but could have been handled automatically). It's sensible to improve the C# experience on VS Code, but not saying the way MS is doing it here is the best way.
    • jve 4y ago
      Ah, no wonder I felt unproductive with C# on VSCode. I couldn't wrap my head around that it is now how you should write C# code with such bad intellisense n stuff.
      • throwuxiytayq 4y ago
        A few years ago I spent a couple of months using C# w/ vscode. The experience was indeed harrowing. Omnisharp would take forever to start up (always downloading a new Omnisharp binary on every restart for some reason?!), type checking was unresponsive to the point of being unusable, and the whole thing would freeze and stop working entirely every once in a while, requiring me to reload the IDE. I tried various versions of Omnisharp (stable/beta) across many C# projects and several vscode deployments on multiple machines and never got it to work well. I eventually decided Omnisharp would never improve and abandoned vscode because of how uniformly bad it was for C#.
• aliswe 4y ago
  Well, I don't really think this would be considered truly evil except by the likes of Stallman. They wanted to make an awesome plugin to C#, they chose to do it closed source to extend their vscode moat. It's quite corporate of them, but i still get their point.
  • Ygg2 4y ago
    > Well, I don't really think this would be considered truly evil except by the likes of Stallman Stallman would consider anything remotely closed source like Chrome unethical. He is not that nuanced.
• segphault 4y ago
  Microsoft can't have it both ways. Crippling open tooling in order to extract more revenue or drive lock-in will undermine their efforts to make .NET relevant outside of the niche occupied by traditional .NET shops. I can't imagine that there's a business justification for this decision that is compelling enough to offset the long-term damage to .NET adoption and community trust.
  • jmnicolas 4y ago
    How are they going to extract more revenues with a proprietary Intellisense VS Code extension? At best they're locking you in their ecosystem, but they don't profit from VS Code directly (emphasis on directly).
    • bogwog 4y ago
      > but they don't profit from VS Code directly (emphasis on directly). When they achieve enough lock-in, that'll likely change.
• kzrdude 4y ago
  Wouldn't happen if Vscode was GPL. Which of course MS would never have done either, of course.
• konsuko 4y ago
  I can definitely say that for me, this is the straw that breaks the camel's back. I am turning my back on the .NET ecosystem, after having written C# for 7 years. The `dotnet watch` debacle from last year, still having key parts like the debugger closed-source and now again with this: It's just too much. I do not want to build anything of value on top of such a shady platform that's completely controlled by one Megacorporation. It's too big of a risk. No matter how many MVPs tout "MS <3 Open Source", how can anyone still believe them after these repeated violations?
  • Swinx43 4y ago
    The problem with MVPs is that they are effectively Microsoft sponsored marketing outlets. I know a few of them personally and they are great people but damn have they drunk the kool-aid.
    • oaiey 4y ago
      To a degree where they are pointless as a consumer but also pointless as an input gatherer. MVP are pointless.
  • unhammer 4y ago
    is `dotnet watch` basically `git ls-files|entr dotnet build` ? (entr is http://eradman.com/entrproject/ http://eradman.com/entrproject/ – like inotifywait but easier)
    • klysm 4y ago
      It may as well be. It can do some legit hot reload, but the set of scenarios where it works is so small it’s effectively useless.
      • exyi 4y ago
        Yea, the drama occurred when it was in preview, so we all thought it's going to have real hot-reload capability as we know from webdev.
• kelnos 4y ago
  This sort of thing has been MS's playbook since I was a kid, or earlier. It surprises me that people are still surprised when things like this happen. I especially think someone with Miguel de Icaza's experience should know better[0]. It's interesting to see the generational difference here. Many of my somewhat-younger (even only by 7-10 years) programmer/techie friends just don't remember the Microsoft of the 80s and 90s, and see all the "good" they've been doing with the open source community in more recent times, and think MS is a pretty good corporate citizen in the tech world. But in reality, MS has just done a great job whitewashing their image[1] in the past 15 years, especially in the past 8 years since Ballmer stepped down and Nadella took the reins. I do believe they're a better, less anti-competitive company than they used to be. But they're still the same company in many ways. I think a big part of their "play nice" strategy was born out of necessity, since they heavily dropped the ball in the late 90s/early 00s when the internet/WWW was really coming into its own, and then again in the early/mid 10s when Windows Phone failed miserably. They just lost the clout to do the anti-competitive bullshit they used to pull. But the desire to do all this stuff is still there. [0] It was clear to me that MS intended .NET to be a wholly-proprietary, Windows-only technology until de Icaza and co. built Mono, when MS grudgingly embraced it. This proprietary extension feels like their standard follow-on of "extend and extinguish", though it's coming a bit later than we'd expect. [1] Bill Gates has also done an amazing job rehabilitating his image through philanthropy. A lot of people forget how his actions at MS probably held back progress in the computing industry for at least a decade (or two?), through forced lock-in and anti-competitive behavior.
  • bayindirh 4y ago
    Yes, a lot of younger developers and "tech citizens" think MS is a saint now. They need to love Open Source / Linux because their platform has lost to the openness, composability and lightness of Linux. They lost the server space, but they're retrying to seize desktop from Linux with WSL and invading the developer tools space and trying to isolate Desktop Linux as an "irrelevant layer which runs MS software and technologies, which is not visible and accessible as the laymen", and Linux server as a layer "which you don't need to think about" (i.e. make Linux irrelevant as a whole OS for developers at scale). Canonical is helping them with this endeavor, because Ubuntu desktop doesn't make money. If they can piggyback the userspace to Windows and earn money from servers, they're kosher. It's really ugly. However, De Icasa is not a saint either by pushing Mono on GNOME and Linux and allowing some borders to dissolve to allow Microsoft in, regardless of it's intended or not.
• tempodox 4y ago
  The actual announcement is here: https://github.com/omnisharp/omnisharp-vscode/issues/5276 https://github.com/omnisharp/omnisharp-vscode/issues/5276 It's not quite as dramatic as the OP is making it out to be.
  • xnorswap 4y ago
    These things almost never are, and the purists risk a purist death spiral. It reminds me of the closed source drivers debate. Someone has a proprietary component they want to incorporate into an open source system. The purists demand they open source that proprietary software if they want it integrated into the open source. The developer wants a compromise, but the purists won't allow it, so the developer is left to pick up their ball and go home. And it rarely ends with the developer open sourcing their proprietary system; they often just shrug and leave, which leaves the open source system behind on tech compared to closed source and then proprietary software truly eats the world.
    • nyanpasu64 4y ago
      Microsoft is not releasing a partly open-source program, they're replacing an open-source {Python, C#} extension with a proprietary one that won't run on VS Codium or Arch Linux packages.
    • bayindirh 4y ago
      > The purists demand they open source that proprietary software if they want it integrated into the open source. ...and as a result we got GPLv2, GPLv3, open Intel, AMD and Broadcom drivers. Lastly Paragon donated NTFS source code to kernel tree (...and probably many smaller examples I've forgot). > The developer wants a compromise, but the purists won't allow it, so the developer is left to pick up their ball and go home. Because purists don't care about the developer, they care about the user. MIT/permissive licenses are for developer freedom, but xGPL and other strong copyleft licenses are for users' freedom. As a developer, I contribute to projects licensed permissively, but I license all my code with GPL, because I care about the user who's gonna use and explore it, and I don't want my handful of users to be locked out of developments. > And it rarely ends with the developer open sourcing their proprietary system; they often just shrug and leave... Again we have Intel, AMD/ATI, Broadcom, Logitech, Paragon software and others.
• bayesian_horse 4y ago
  Embrace. Extend. Extinguish.
• wheresmycraisin 4y ago
  One fear seems to be that Microsoft will divert resources from omnisharp and it will die slowly. This should serve as a reminder that open source by a large company without a supporting community is basically the same as a project with a very low bus number -- manage your risks accordingly.
  • blackoil 4y ago
    Is MS contributing to Omnisharp or is it an independent open source project? They can still suck its Oxygen, as it will no longer be default C# lsp and MS version will have lot more investment.
• ThinkBeat 4y ago
  Is this not pretty close to: "core open source" model that a lot of the open source projects featured on HN has adopted? They give you access to a lot of things for free, and then they offer proprietary solutions on top of that. and if they follow the pattern maybe they will start charging or some proprietary features.
  • yccs27 4y ago
    They are free to offer their own proprietary VS Code extension, likely no one would have a problem with that. What is very objectionable is the way they are trying to destroy and replace the existing FOSS OmniSharp extension!
  • draw_down 4y ago
• littlecranky67 4y ago
  I don't understand the fuzz about it. There are a lot of commercial/closed-source devtools out there (IntelliJ, Rider) for otherwise open languages/platforms that devs are obviously happy to use and pay for. We are not demanding that every Java/Python/PHP etc. tool is open source and free, why is there this double-standard for Microsoft?
  • bluehatbrit 4y ago
    In this case they didn't just plan, build, and release a feature in VS. They got all the way through the building and most of the QA for a feature in the core .net cli and decided to remove it, not for quality reasons, but because they wanted VS to have a feature others didn't. The work had been done and then they rushed through a PR to avoid community comment to remove the code. If python removed a feature so a specific IDE could have it exclusively I think people would also be upset.
    • scandinavian 4y ago
      I feel like you are talking about dotnet watch thing which this post is not about.
      • bluehatbrit 4y ago
        You're right, I focused on one of the sub-links too much when I was replying to that. My bad, thanks
  • adli89 4y ago
    Because Microsoft claims they love open source, apparently they are not allowed to do anything closed source, ever.
    • exyi 4y ago
      Look, nobody complains about Visual Studio. People get angry when suffocate existing tools with their free and "open source looking" alternatives. Ask Python devs if they think that their VSCode extension is open ... Even I thought it was open yesterday, turns out it's not and they pretty much removed support Jedi, the acutally open language server.
• mindaslab 4y ago
  Any one who believes in Microsoft or Apple is a fool.
• rootw0rm 4y ago
  Forever and ever ago I used OmniSharp to add C# scripting support to a game hacking tool I created. Syntax highlighting, code completion, and compiled to a binary when you hit run. My code was absolutely terrible, but I had a blast writing it all. Much respect to the OmniSharp crew. edit - Man, the ways I abused .NET back then...hooking native code and jumping to a .NET 2.0 function...totally feasible, lol. Who cares if you have to inject the entire .NET runtime into the target process?
• akagusu 4y ago
  I am waiting for M$ to do the same with VS Code. I will definitely enjoy this day.
• dustinmoris 4y ago
  As I have said it on the original GitHub issue, there are multiple reasons for why the lives of .NET developers will always suck. First of all every division at Microsoft needs to be cash positive. At DevDiv (developer devision) the main bread maker is Visual Studio. .NET is free and makes no money. VS Code is free and makes no money. OmniSharp is/was free and made no money. ASP.NET is free and makes no money. It's mostly SQL and Visual Studio licenses which pay the salaries of the .NET team. For that reason Microsoft can never let it happen that a free and open .NET extension can make VS Code a good enough experience for the vast majority of .NET developers. It's not by accident that despite Microsoft owning C#, .NET, VS Code and OmniSharp the C# experience on VS Code was the worst of its kind in comparison to any other programming language. It's by choice in order to push developers to use Visual Studio. Another big reason is that Microsoft needs to keep a tight grip around their .NET developers, because .NET is the main driver to Azure adoption. Azure is an extremely unattractive product to any other development community. Azure is slow, it breaks, it over promises and under delivers and it is almost twice as expensive to AWS or GCP once you actually establish feature parity. It's mainly .NET devs who get cleverly pushed to Azure and siloed away from anything non-Microsoft by Microsoft. The world runs in the cloud nowadays and the cloud is a unix based environment. Microsoft has felt the bleed of its traditional Windows centric developer base migrating away to macOS and Linux and becoming more wise about their technology choices. In order to stop the bleed Microsoft tries hard to convince its remaining Windows developers to remain in the Windows/Azure silo by giving them just enough sugar coating so they never step outside. WSL, the new unix-like terminal in Windows, Windows containers, etc. are all attempts to keep Windows folks on Windows and therefore closer to Azure. The irony with all of this is of course that if you are a software developer, you'll have a MUCH MUCH better experience with Microsoft owned products (GitHub, VS Code, etc.) if you choose any programming language which is NOT .NET, because (at least for now) they will not try to come after you to lock you into their Windows/Azure based silo.
  • tester756 4y ago
    >It's mainly .NET devs who get cleverly pushed to Azure and siloed away from anything non-Microsoft by Microsoft I guess I'm different kind of .NET Dev because I cannot say how I'm pushed to Azure You're talking about one of the deployment options avaliable from Visual Studio? https://i.imgur.com/fbpJTLK.png https://i.imgur.com/fbpJTLK.png >siloed away from anything non-Microsoft by Microsoft Yea, that's why is incredibly easy to use almost any database with Microsoft's EntityFramework I will tell you that .NET Core working fine on Linux is what actually brought me to Linux world (renting servers for years)
• Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
  I'm an old-school GNU stalwart, and after Mircosoft has done in 1990s-2010s I wouldn't touch anything Microsoft makes even with a 10 feet pole, nor suggest anyone touching it. They say they're different now, open source and all, but still, nah. It is a wolf in a sheep's clothing. Anything Microsoft does is a potential Trojan horse, don't use it.
  • oaiey 4y ago
    I hope you do not touch anything from a big corporation like Go, Java, Swift or anything like that . I can understand your sentiment, it is just time to embrace the the list of non free places need to be extended by many more companies and the FUD solely on Microsoft need to be extinguished.
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
• mariusmg 4y ago
  Microsoft pays quite a few people to work on Code. I assume the code is open because they gain some value from community submitting PRs and is good publicity to develop it in the open on Github. But, make no mistake, this is not a OSS project in the true sense of the word. MS will ALWAYS be the decision maker here and will do whatever it benefits them. They pay people to work on this full time, they get to have the last word. IT'S THAT SIMPLE.
  • Strom 4y ago
    It's true but the same thing is true for almost every open source project. Instead of Microsoft it's usually a single guy or perhaps a duo who has the ultimate say. Everyone else's word is just a suggestion. It's a rarity for an open source project to work under some sort of democracy where random developers have a say.
• foota 4y ago
  What was the outcome of the hot reload stuff?
• barnacled 4y ago
  This reminds me somewhat of golang - ostensibly open source project but in reality all meaningful decisions are made by those at the company (including shameful throwing away of community work). Perhaps we need a different term to differentiate between open source projects that truly have open governance vs. ones that are essentially bolting on some open source shaped stuff.
• hdjjhhvvhga 4y ago
  I don't understand one thing. Miguel saw the all the ugliness of MS since the late nineties. He is fully aware what EEE means and how MS successfully used this strategy to crush any kind of competition they wanted over the decades. Still, he decided to base all his open projects and professional career on faith they could be the good guys. Guess what, they've never been. We were trying to tell this to Miguel for years, but he paid no attention. He loved the COM and DCOM architectures, the registry, and many other MS-specific things that we either hated, saw no benefit of, or perceived as threats because of patents. He still wanted to go ahead. Well, at least he can't say he didn't see it coming.
• jaylittle 4y ago
  As a Linux loving .NET developer, this is very sad to see. Goddamit MS.
• withinboredom 4y ago
  This assumes that the entire company is “in on it” when the simplest answer is that the devs who work there wanted something but the core IDE team couldn’t add it directly so told them to make an extension. At least that’s how it usually works when you end up with something like this — I work at Automattic and when we want a new feature on WordPress.com, it usually starts as a plugin that gets activated on every site in a mandatory sort of way.
• tsujp 4y ago
  This is depressing. Last years `dotnet watch` and now this. I kind of went with the tide into the position I'm in (basically a C# developer for that side of my job) and as much as I was impressed with, "oh .NET is open source and cross platform now well done" and "oh, F# is a really nice language that can take advantage of the .NET ecosystem well done" it's things like THIS that make me want to run. I kind of want to. Why participate in an ecosystem where the biggest corporate overlord is trying to reduce your ability to _do things_. I'd rather use Ruby or Crystal for OOP (and I want to, they are both amazing) and OCaml for functional programming (of which F# is basically a ".NET OCaml" clone).
  • josteink 4y ago
    > Why participate in an ecosystem where the biggest corporate overlord is trying to reduce your ability to _do things_. For free. If you pay, they’ll help you do more things. That’s unfortunately the motivation a for-profit corporation has.
  • premun 4y ago
    How is Microsoft reducing your ability? No functionality got behind a paywall. On contrary, the VS Code plugin will actually get much better because of this effort - you can read the authors of OmniSharp clearly stating this[0], links are in the comments above. Microsoft spends a lot of money to bring you free experiences. Then it has the business on top of that where it offers better experience. Nothing different to what JetBrains does in this regard. Except that this fuels how you are able to fund the free experience in the first place. [0] https://github.com/omnisharp/omnisharp-vscode/issues/5276#issuecomment-1157008020 https://github.com/omnisharp/omnisharp-vscode/issues/5276#is...
• osigurdson 4y ago
  The problem is, this kind of practice works against MS in the long run.
  • kgwxd 4y ago
    I think that run is going to be longer than my life. In 30+ years, I've yet to see this type of thing bite them hard enough to really hurt.
• intrasight 4y ago
  Debugging? Intellisense? Training-wheels of you youth ;)
• bob1029 4y ago
  .NET is the most open, non-trivial ecosystem I have ever participated in. I experienced 2 different problems with .NET (back in 2.x/3.x days), and was able to have interaction with the actual MS developers on their Github issue page without any sort of bullshit overhead process. Within days, I saw traction on my comments and within months I saw PRs that ultimately resolved the issue I presented. The following year, I was deploying framework code to my customers' instances which incorporated fixes to my concerns. Perhaps I am unaware of just how much better it is with the other ecosystems, but for me this is enough interaction with my framework vendor. Are we upset that we have to pay money for the privilege of using other peoples' intellectual property? Or are we asserting that Microsoft is stealing other peoples' IP? I am trying to find the actual crime here.
  • cerved 4y ago
    being open is not about not paying but using it however you like, not constrained to VisualGarbage XYZ or Windows 15-xtra ultra edition
    • babypuncher 4y ago
      Say what you want, but Visual Studio 2022 is one of the best IDE I've used, way better than Eclipse. And You're not stuck on it either, JetBrains Rider is a 100% viable alternative and often preferred by many .NET developers. Windows is also not a requirement unless you are using old Windows-specific frameworks like WPF. ASP.NET, EFCore, IdentityServer, and everything else you need to build a web app works equally on Windows, Linux, and macOS.
      • giobox 4y ago
        While I like Visual Studio, comparing to Eclipse is a little unfair. Exactly like DotNet today, you can use any IDE you like, InteliJ will compare extremely favorably to Visual Studio if we want to pick a good Java IDE to compare.
        • babypuncher 4y ago
• fartcannon 4y ago
  It's called Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. You are in the extend phase.
• osigurdson 4y ago
  Come on, Microsoft. You've spent years cultivating your image as a good steward of open source. Don't throw it away for essentially nothing.
• JamesSwift 4y ago
  Its so disappointing because its a very exciting time for .net as a framework with all thats happening in .net 6 and 7. But if you mingle at all around the .net community you start to notice that theres a bunch of politics going on behind the scenes and teams are not on good terms with each other (my interpretation is that the Visual Studio team is really rubbing people the wrong way). This could be a time of explosive growth for .net but its just a weird, frustrating experience most of the time.
• cpurdy 4y ago
  Oh, .NET is still a thing? In 2022? Cool.
  • tester756 4y ago
    Which environment/lang in your opinion outperforms/would be better choice in corporate / small companies or average web dev setting?
• throw7 4y ago
  I mean Miguel de Icaza chose the bed he lies in. I knew this from day one of ".NET" and I'm sure Miguel knew it too.
  • oaiey 4y ago
    He literally built his own bed and then choses to sell the bed in the hope the other bed would be like his own. Now he warns about the attached closet is the problem
• andresalarcong 4y ago
  C++ could be an option? technical design and roadmap managed by foundation, and there are good tool ecosystems for this language, what do you think? You know if I choose Golang, Java, Kotlin, DotNet will be probably that this history repeating.
  • oaiey 4y ago
    C++ is doing that a bit too much.
    • andresalarcong 4y ago
      Rust instead
• andresalarcong 4y ago
  c++ could be an good option to move? i mean, if i choose golang, dotnet, java, kotlin all that options is managed by companies that found their own economics benefits. at the expense of open source, of democracy, of innovation, it has already been observed that this transcends to political issues, case of vetoing countries in conflict, cases like huawei with android, case of goland, case of java and now dotnet. can we then choose cpp as our development philosophy ? I observe clang, llmv, and the language design by iso standard
• TimTheTinker 4y ago
  Well then, sounds like it may be time for the .NET foundation to create a fork of v6 and add hot reloading back. Perhaps call it ".NET 6 Open Edition".
• goto11 4y ago
  The linked "article" is confusing, but the issue seem to be this: The C# language server for Visual Studio Code (the components which provide language-aware UI like tooltips, code completion, squiggles etc.) is currently fully open source, but MS is going to refactor it to incorporate some closed source components. It is not really clear to me why they are doing this and what they hope to achieve. Perhaps they want to create a for-pay "premium" version of the component? VS Code is probably cannibalizing Visual Studio sales. If enterprise customers move from Visual Studio to VS Code, MS will lose lots of money.
• ur-whale 4y ago
  This tired old trick is the same one Apple pulled off 20 years ago when they first released OSX, and which grocery retailers have been pulling off since the day supermarkets were invented: dangle a nice, quasi-free product to get the customer into the shop where he becomes a captive audience and you can ram the rest of your inventory down their throat. Oooh, look, we're OpenSource now, OSX is Unix and the source code is available to all. This was a blatant lie by omission (omitting the giant pile of proprietary crap heaped on top of the FOSS layers) but it worked like a charm: tons of OSS devs drank the kool-aid switched to using Macs. Lo and behold, 20 years down the road, the Apple ecosystem is the most closed flytrap ever devised by an IT company. MSFT is pulling the exact same trick here: .NET is an integral part of the MSFT ecosystem, most of which is completely closed. Don't be fooled. Don't drink the kool-aid.
• MichaelRust 4y ago
  https://rentry.co/areweweloveopensauceyet https://rentry.co/areweweloveopensauceyet
• cutler 4y ago
  For those of you too young to remember check-out Microsoft's history of embrace and extend, their Linux/SCO patent racket and their refusal to implement web standards when Internet Explorer had dominant market share. If you had lived through this you would NEVER trust Microsoft no matter how loudly they trumpet their absurd claim to be supporters of Linux and open source. They only reason Microsoft support Linux and open source is because they failed to destroy them. .Net is just another of their desperate attempts to lock everyone into the Microsoft Way before revealing the hidden lock-in.
• Havoc 4y ago
  I'm just confused why people looking for open platforms are going for .NET at all
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
• labrador 4y ago
  I'd wager there is a large overlap between Open Source maximalists and Communists
• samoit 4y ago
  No one could have imagined this...
• amir734jj 4y ago
  I'm biased because I work at Microsoft but I have been using .net long before I joined Microsoft and I'm very pleased with the effort Microsoft is putting in .net specially with AOT compilation and native support coming in very soon.
• mcdermott 4y ago
  Embrace, Extend, Extinguish never stopped being the strategy, they just took a short PR break to reset their reputation so they could snare the next generation into their trap of an ecosystem.