3 ms·

It is quite easy to see that the "embrace" is to release a core into the open source world. They embraced the idea of open source and released something, they

by taeric 4y ago

It is quite easy to see that the "embrace" is to release a core into the open source world. They embraced the idea of open source and released something, they extended the user base into the world of the non-free option. The thinking is if they can get a critical mass of folks onto the option that is non-free, they will extinguish the free option by no longer supporting it. And this is not much different from the things they did this with back in the day. Used to, you wouldn't target open source, as much as you would student audience. The battle used to be more over what corporate workforces would want and use. The open source development scene changed that a bit. Though, it is kind of... interesting to consider how many tools and ideas have been lost in that process.

shkkmo 4y ago
> The thinking is if they can get a critical mass of folks onto the option that is non-free, they will extinguish the free option by no longer supporting it. I assume you mean "non-free" as in speech, not beer, since VSCode is free. Hasn't that "critical mass" been the case since day one? I can't imagine that VSCodium built binaries have ever had more than a tiny fraction of the user-base of VSCode? Thus I don't see how "Extinquish" plays a role here. I still think it makes more sense to think of the strategy as more akin to the FOSS-washing / freemium models used by many companies.
- taeric 4y ago
  Yes, non-free as in speech. Though, if they were to flip it from the "beer" sense of the term, I'm not entirely clear that would make much difference. As long as they have tripped the critical mass of the userbase. And it is very similar to the freemium models used by many companies. Apologies if I made that sound like a disagreement. I think the point was more that Microsoft doing it is part of their old game plan. Random companies acting in other means is a bit of a non-sequitur. That said, I think it is common idea that many other companies have tried to extinguish competition in their "free" market? That is, many companies do what they can to make it easy for hobbyists and such to use things for free, but as soon as you are in a company, they try to milk the company for fees.

by taeric 4y ago

shkkmo 4y ago

> The thinking is if they can get a critical mass of folks onto the option that is non-free, they will extinguish the free option by no longer supporting it. I assume you mean "non-free" as in speech, not beer, since VSCode is free. Hasn't that "critical mass" been the case since day one? I can't imagine that VSCodium built binaries have ever had more than a tiny fraction of the user-base of VSCode? Thus I don't see how "Extinquish" plays a role here. I still think it makes more sense to think of the strategy as more akin to the FOSS-washing / freemium models used by many companies.

taeric 4y ago
Yes, non-free as in speech. Though, if they were to flip it from the "beer" sense of the term, I'm not entirely clear that would make much difference. As long as they have tripped the critical mass of the userbase. And it is very similar to the freemium models used by many companies. Apologies if I made that sound like a disagreement. I think the point was more that Microsoft doing it is part of their old game plan. Random companies acting in other means is a bit of a non-sequitur. That said, I think it is common idea that many other companies have tried to extinguish competition in their "free" market? That is, many companies do what they can to make it easy for hobbyists and such to use things for free, but as soon as you are in a company, they try to milk the company for fees.