5 ms·

> They did a wonderful job with C# and .NET Core. Ah yes, the ecosystems where features such as hot reloading would only be in paid offers unless the ecosystem

> They did a wonderful job with C# and .NET Core. Ah yes, the ecosystems where features such as hot reloading would only be in paid offers unless the ecosystem didn't start to shout at them when their plans changed from "of course it's free" to "sorry, paid customers only". > But you need to remember your org charts; the Edge and Windows 11 decision-makers are not the same people with the same incentives. I couldn't care less about their org charts. That's just a way for employees to feel better about what their colleagues are doing, "but that's not what I do at the company, I'm doing great stuff". Just like Googlers trying to convince themselves they're doing great stuff for the world because they happen to hack on FOSS stuff while their colleagues spend most of their days optimizing ads and siphoning as much data as they can from their users.

gtirloni 3y ago
We often look at companies as a single monolith but that isn't conductive to productive discussions. OP is giving a different perspective, a more detailed and granular one. One interest counterpoint would be that the problematic behavior is encouraged by the CEO, then the different units wouldn't matter much (well, unless they have a tendency to go rogue). Anyway, all idle speculation on my part but I welcome the perspective.
- capableweb 3y ago
  Maybe if they stopped trying to become monoliths, people would stop considering them as monoliths? What purpose could buying GitHub serve if they don't want GitHub to be a part of Microsoft? They are obviously trying to do everything, via a centralized organization which is Microsoft, so by all measures, they are or want to become, a monolith. Regardless of what other people in the organization is doing, the organization as a whole is represented by everyone working their, no matter if they work on ads, cloud, FOSS or office products. You cannot work in one area and somehow ignore the work of your colleagues,
  - kbenson 3y ago
    That's sort of like condemning all of the U.S. because one state does something you don't agree with. In a large organization different departments may do different things and have different incentives, and until they overstep too much may have quite a bit of autonomy. Considering all actions taken as part of some overarching plan is probably assuming too much. Some actions probably are towards some larger strategy, but myriad other ones are likely sub-level decisions. Always looking at large corporations such as Microsoft as one entity with a cohesive goal is easy, but it's also simplistic, which doesn't always yield a useful and productive discussion.
    - cumshitpiss 3y ago
      [dead]
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      > That's sort of like condemning all of the U.S. because one state does something you don't agree with. It's more like condemning all of the US because it has implemented a national policy that only one state really wanted. It doesn't matter that only one state wanted it. It's still national policy and thus fair game to criticize the entire nation for.
      - kbenson 3y ago
        Is it a company wide policy that Microsoft apps open links in edge, or a Teams and Edge thing? Do office apps open links in edge? Does VS code? If they do, then I agree with you. If they don't, then I don't, for what should be obvious reasons.
        JohnFen 3y ago
        If a company has implemented it in a product that is publicly released, it's a company policy even if only the dev team was responsible for it.
        3y ago
- Eisenstein 3y ago
  A friendly nitpick: the word 'conductive' is a physics term. The term which means "tending to promote or assist" is 'conducive' with no 't', pronounced 'cundoosiv'. > Something conducive "leads to" a desirable result. A cozy living room may be conducive to relaxed conversation, just as a boardroom may be conducive to more intense discussions. Particular tax policies are often conducive to savings and investment, whereas others are conducive to consumer spending. Notice that conducive is almost always followed by to. * https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conducive https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conducive
  - Aeolun 3y ago
    What the hell? They’re separate words? How did I go at least half my life without knowing this.
    - trzy 3y ago
      Wait till you learn that "deprecated" and "depreciated" are different words, too.
      - dizhn 3y ago
        They are close enough.
      - JohnFen 3y ago
        But "flammable" and "inflammable" are the same. English is fun!!
      - Aeolun 3y ago
        Unfortunately I knew this one already. It’s be too much to hope I could have my mind broken twice in a day ;)
  - gtirloni 3y ago
    Thank you. English is not my first language so I appreciate the correction. TIL.
  - 3y ago
tester756 3y ago
You really picked poor thing to try to bash on since .NET ecosystem is one of the most sanest out of all ecosystems Give me something as sane, coherent and friendly as .NET ecosystem for C and C++ and I would be willing to pay for that
- capableweb 3y ago
  I didn't pick .NET, parent did. And regardless if the ecosystem is nice to work in or not, Microsoft tries their true and tested strategy of EEE with that ecosystem as well.
- mananaysiempre 3y ago
  The example is not .NET in general, but that specific event when Microsoft reneged on open development tooling[1]. For some people, that was the moment they stopped trusting "new Microsoft" to keep their word (though for me, it was when the Python language server was replaced with a DRM-locked, LSP-noncompliant one[2] a bit before that; unlike with .NET hot reload, they didn't backtrack there). I can think the company makes great open .NET tools and at the same time not trust them to close those down on a whim. Does anyone know where the open xlang implementation of MIDL[3] went, by the way? (Unlike the original 1990s MIDL, you can't reimplement this one from the language grammar in the docs, because there is no language grammar in the docs[4].) [1] https://dusted.codes/can-we-trust-microsoft-with-open-source https://dusted.codes/can-we-trust-microsoft-with-open-source and links there [2] https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release/issues/4 https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release/issues/4 [3] https://github.com/microsoft/xlang/pull/529 https://github.com/microsoft/xlang/pull/529 [4] I vaguely remember a GitHub issue where a Microsoft employee explicitly refused to provide one ("not a priority" or some such synonym for "we don't care, fuck off"), but I can't find it
- madeofpalk 3y ago
  > since .NET ecosystem is one of the most sanest out of all ecosystems Is it? This is the same ecosystem that has .Net, .Net Core, .Net Standard, and .Net Framework as all different (and overlapping? who knows) products?
  - 3y ago

gtirloni 3y ago

We often look at companies as a single monolith but that isn't conductive to productive discussions. OP is giving a different perspective, a more detailed and granular one. One interest counterpoint would be that the problematic behavior is encouraged by the CEO, then the different units wouldn't matter much (well, unless they have a tendency to go rogue). Anyway, all idle speculation on my part but I welcome the perspective.

capableweb 3y ago
Maybe if they stopped trying to become monoliths, people would stop considering them as monoliths? What purpose could buying GitHub serve if they don't want GitHub to be a part of Microsoft? They are obviously trying to do everything, via a centralized organization which is Microsoft, so by all measures, they are or want to become, a monolith. Regardless of what other people in the organization is doing, the organization as a whole is represented by everyone working their, no matter if they work on ads, cloud, FOSS or office products. You cannot work in one area and somehow ignore the work of your colleagues,
- kbenson 3y ago
  That's sort of like condemning all of the U.S. because one state does something you don't agree with. In a large organization different departments may do different things and have different incentives, and until they overstep too much may have quite a bit of autonomy. Considering all actions taken as part of some overarching plan is probably assuming too much. Some actions probably are towards some larger strategy, but myriad other ones are likely sub-level decisions. Always looking at large corporations such as Microsoft as one entity with a cohesive goal is easy, but it's also simplistic, which doesn't always yield a useful and productive discussion.
  - cumshitpiss 3y ago
    [dead]
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > That's sort of like condemning all of the U.S. because one state does something you don't agree with. It's more like condemning all of the US because it has implemented a national policy that only one state really wanted. It doesn't matter that only one state wanted it. It's still national policy and thus fair game to criticize the entire nation for.
    - kbenson 3y ago
      Is it a company wide policy that Microsoft apps open links in edge, or a Teams and Edge thing? Do office apps open links in edge? Does VS code? If they do, then I agree with you. If they don't, then I don't, for what should be obvious reasons.
      - JohnFen 3y ago
        If a company has implemented it in a product that is publicly released, it's a company policy even if only the dev team was responsible for it.
        3y ago
Eisenstein 3y ago
A friendly nitpick: the word 'conductive' is a physics term. The term which means "tending to promote or assist" is 'conducive' with no 't', pronounced 'cundoosiv'. > Something conducive "leads to" a desirable result. A cozy living room may be conducive to relaxed conversation, just as a boardroom may be conducive to more intense discussions. Particular tax policies are often conducive to savings and investment, whereas others are conducive to consumer spending. Notice that conducive is almost always followed by to. * https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conducive https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conducive
- Aeolun 3y ago
  What the hell? They’re separate words? How did I go at least half my life without knowing this.
  - trzy 3y ago
    Wait till you learn that "deprecated" and "depreciated" are different words, too.
    - dizhn 3y ago
      They are close enough.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      But "flammable" and "inflammable" are the same. English is fun!!
    - Aeolun 3y ago
      Unfortunately I knew this one already. It’s be too much to hope I could have my mind broken twice in a day ;)
- gtirloni 3y ago
  Thank you. English is not my first language so I appreciate the correction. TIL.
- 3y ago

tester756 3y ago

You really picked poor thing to try to bash on since .NET ecosystem is one of the most sanest out of all ecosystems Give me something as sane, coherent and friendly as .NET ecosystem for C and C++ and I would be willing to pay for that

capableweb 3y ago
I didn't pick .NET, parent did. And regardless if the ecosystem is nice to work in or not, Microsoft tries their true and tested strategy of EEE with that ecosystem as well.
mananaysiempre 3y ago
The example is not .NET in general, but that specific event when Microsoft reneged on open development tooling[1]. For some people, that was the moment they stopped trusting "new Microsoft" to keep their word (though for me, it was when the Python language server was replaced with a DRM-locked, LSP-noncompliant one[2] a bit before that; unlike with .NET hot reload, they didn't backtrack there). I can think the company makes great open .NET tools and at the same time not trust them to close those down on a whim. Does anyone know where the open xlang implementation of MIDL[3] went, by the way? (Unlike the original 1990s MIDL, you can't reimplement this one from the language grammar in the docs, because there is no language grammar in the docs[4].) [1] https://dusted.codes/can-we-trust-microsoft-with-open-source https://dusted.codes/can-we-trust-microsoft-with-open-source and links there [2] https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release/issues/4 https://github.com/microsoft/pylance-release/issues/4 [3] https://github.com/microsoft/xlang/pull/529 https://github.com/microsoft/xlang/pull/529 [4] I vaguely remember a GitHub issue where a Microsoft employee explicitly refused to provide one ("not a priority" or some such synonym for "we don't care, fuck off"), but I can't find it
madeofpalk 3y ago
> since .NET ecosystem is one of the most sanest out of all ecosystems Is it? This is the same ecosystem that has .Net, .Net Core, .Net Standard, and .Net Framework as all different (and overlapping? who knows) products?
- 3y ago