7 ms·

With GitHub, TypeScript and VS code I'm probably using more Microsoft products than before.

by madisp 2y ago

rbanffy 2y ago
Of those three, the only one that drives revenue to MS is GitHub.
- cjblomqvist 2y ago
  Not true, at least not according to MS themselves. MS have done several studies and adoption of these tools drive adoption of Azure. That's why MS invests in it. They've been quite clear about this. The one platform/OS was Windows. The new platform/OS is Azure/Cloud. It's almost like saying Google doesn't make any revenues from search, only from selling ads.
- actionfromafar 2y ago
  VS Code is also low-key keeping Windows relevant as a developer OS. If something else came along which was truly very excellent but was only working well with Linux, and VS Code was not there to be the de-facto go-to solution for most new devs, it could eat away more of Windows marketshare. So I see VS Code as a slight moat, also in its promulgation of dotnet-isms. So I think VS Code drives some revenue Microsofts way in a pretty diffuse but real way.
  - KptMarchewa 2y ago
    I'm not sure how it's improving Windows relevancy, second most popular IDE group - Jetbrains ones - are on Windows too.
    - actionfromafar 2y ago
      That's why I wrote slight. VS Code is more of a backstop to make sure developing on Windows doesn't suck. Don't let Windows fall behind kind of thing. Every cross platform thing is biggest on Windows by default because Windows is the biggest platform.
    - makeitdouble 2y ago
      VSCode Server and other remote dev servers are a big deal. Before we had to sync or mount a remote partition to manage the gap between Windows and the *nix server. I remember just plain using vim over ssh to avoid the hassle. That pain existed under macos and linux as well, but to such a lower extent as you could do so much more locally. While Jetbrains does it too, VSCode being strong guarantees it stays a viable path in the future.
  - fakedang 2y ago
    How is VS Code a moat when it's platform agnostic? Plus the developer market is just a fraction of the overall market. MS Office is the real moat, as is Windows XP/7. Everyone use MS Office because Google Slides/Docs/Sheets is a silly contender to the MS Office suite. Windows XP/7 because that's what a huge percent of the human population using computers grew up on today, so they're most familiar with it. And let's be honest, that's not going away, even as MS enshittifies Windows 11, simply because no Linux build can apparently mirror the Windows XP/7 UI (for some reason, not even Mint) while Apple is hell-bent on doing its own thing on the sidelines. The day MS breaks Office suite is the day Microsoft goes down, but that's unlikely because the current crop of devs at MS don't even know how to get started. Microsoft could literally not do anything and still make tons in revenue.
    - rightbyte 2y ago
      > And let's be honest, that's not going away, even as MS enshittifies Windows 11, simply because no Linux build can apparently mirror the Windows XP/7 UI Windows 10/11 does a really bad job at emulating XP/7 UI. It is about as foreign to XP users as Debian or whatever. I made a XP VM the other month to run some insane software I had to run at work. I felt so much at home. It was so nice. Everything was awesome. The control panel was awesome. The distinct buttons were awesome. The start menu was awesome. The 'My computer' at desktop root was awesome. All in muscle memory, still. Then I am back out to 10 and can't figure out where my app shortcuts are without knowing their name or what of the 3 or 4 different control panels I am supposed to use.
      - fakedang 2y ago
        Now you just gave me the itch to learn how to make a Windows XP VM.
raxxorraxor 2y ago
They bought it. If Microsoft had developed it, we would get something like sourcesafe (was that the name?). Sure, the investment was quite sensible, although I don't think they can change it for their ambitions too much. Microsofts conquest against open source was of course a wrong strategy of Balmer.
- tylerchilds 2y ago
  this is the funny thing about microsoft they are way better at buying and selling software than ideating and creating it. successful microsoft products are acquisitions.
  - meekins 2y ago
    Same story with Azure. All the good services are acquisitions, rest is low quality feature catch-up with AWS augmented by a terrible IAM system.
  - benrutter 2y ago
    I agree but I'm not sure it's just microsoft- meta's instagram, whatsapp and quest are all acquisitions of already sucessful products. Oracle are similar. I think, up to a point, and especially in the US where antitrust is pretty lax, it's a very safe investment to just buy other already sucessful companies.
    - tylerchilds 2y ago
      The most glaring example in recent memory would be the amazon monopoly and the evidence i submit is diapers.com with enough money, you can fund your investments to strategically take down every mom and pop. amazon can’t take on every consumer vertical simultaneously, but they used their funds to drive diapers.com into the red, because as a parent you’re scrwed either way and comparing food to diapers, will buy the cheaper diapers instead of the cheaper food. amazon wanted diapers.com diapers.com said, we’re good this isn’t a billion dollar enterprise, but it pays the bills. amazon bought it after making sure they couldn’t actually use it to pay the bills.
znpy 2y ago
> With GitHub, TypeScript and VS code I'm probably using more Microsoft products than before. cool, how much money have you paid to Microsoft to use those? Except for Github (which they bought, by the way) probably not much. And github has some serious competitors (Gitlab which is just great and to a lesser extent, bitbucket).
- linhns 2y ago
  GitHub is still a lot better than GitLab. Nice CLI, simple user interface that's not a pain in the eye like what GitLab has.

With GitHub, TypeScript and VS code I'm probably using more Microsoft products than before.

by madisp 2y ago

With GitHub, TypeScript and VS code I'm probably using more Microsoft products than before.

rbanffy 2y ago

Of those three, the only one that drives revenue to MS is GitHub.

cjblomqvist 2y ago
Not true, at least not according to MS themselves. MS have done several studies and adoption of these tools drive adoption of Azure. That's why MS invests in it. They've been quite clear about this. The one platform/OS was Windows. The new platform/OS is Azure/Cloud. It's almost like saying Google doesn't make any revenues from search, only from selling ads.
actionfromafar 2y ago
VS Code is also low-key keeping Windows relevant as a developer OS. If something else came along which was truly very excellent but was only working well with Linux, and VS Code was not there to be the de-facto go-to solution for most new devs, it could eat away more of Windows marketshare. So I see VS Code as a slight moat, also in its promulgation of dotnet-isms. So I think VS Code drives some revenue Microsofts way in a pretty diffuse but real way.
- KptMarchewa 2y ago
  I'm not sure how it's improving Windows relevancy, second most popular IDE group - Jetbrains ones - are on Windows too.
  - actionfromafar 2y ago
    That's why I wrote slight. VS Code is more of a backstop to make sure developing on Windows doesn't suck. Don't let Windows fall behind kind of thing. Every cross platform thing is biggest on Windows by default because Windows is the biggest platform.
  - makeitdouble 2y ago
    VSCode Server and other remote dev servers are a big deal. Before we had to sync or mount a remote partition to manage the gap between Windows and the *nix server. I remember just plain using vim over ssh to avoid the hassle. That pain existed under macos and linux as well, but to such a lower extent as you could do so much more locally. While Jetbrains does it too, VSCode being strong guarantees it stays a viable path in the future.
- fakedang 2y ago
  How is VS Code a moat when it's platform agnostic? Plus the developer market is just a fraction of the overall market. MS Office is the real moat, as is Windows XP/7. Everyone use MS Office because Google Slides/Docs/Sheets is a silly contender to the MS Office suite. Windows XP/7 because that's what a huge percent of the human population using computers grew up on today, so they're most familiar with it. And let's be honest, that's not going away, even as MS enshittifies Windows 11, simply because no Linux build can apparently mirror the Windows XP/7 UI (for some reason, not even Mint) while Apple is hell-bent on doing its own thing on the sidelines. The day MS breaks Office suite is the day Microsoft goes down, but that's unlikely because the current crop of devs at MS don't even know how to get started. Microsoft could literally not do anything and still make tons in revenue.
  - rightbyte 2y ago
    > And let's be honest, that's not going away, even as MS enshittifies Windows 11, simply because no Linux build can apparently mirror the Windows XP/7 UI Windows 10/11 does a really bad job at emulating XP/7 UI. It is about as foreign to XP users as Debian or whatever. I made a XP VM the other month to run some insane software I had to run at work. I felt so much at home. It was so nice. Everything was awesome. The control panel was awesome. The distinct buttons were awesome. The start menu was awesome. The 'My computer' at desktop root was awesome. All in muscle memory, still. Then I am back out to 10 and can't figure out where my app shortcuts are without knowing their name or what of the 3 or 4 different control panels I am supposed to use.
    - fakedang 2y ago
      Now you just gave me the itch to learn how to make a Windows XP VM.

raxxorraxor 2y ago

They bought it. If Microsoft had developed it, we would get something like sourcesafe (was that the name?). Sure, the investment was quite sensible, although I don't think they can change it for their ambitions too much. Microsofts conquest against open source was of course a wrong strategy of Balmer.

tylerchilds 2y ago
this is the funny thing about microsoft they are way better at buying and selling software than ideating and creating it. successful microsoft products are acquisitions.
- meekins 2y ago
  Same story with Azure. All the good services are acquisitions, rest is low quality feature catch-up with AWS augmented by a terrible IAM system.
- benrutter 2y ago
  I agree but I'm not sure it's just microsoft- meta's instagram, whatsapp and quest are all acquisitions of already sucessful products. Oracle are similar. I think, up to a point, and especially in the US where antitrust is pretty lax, it's a very safe investment to just buy other already sucessful companies.
  - tylerchilds 2y ago
    The most glaring example in recent memory would be the amazon monopoly and the evidence i submit is diapers.com with enough money, you can fund your investments to strategically take down every mom and pop. amazon can’t take on every consumer vertical simultaneously, but they used their funds to drive diapers.com into the red, because as a parent you’re scrwed either way and comparing food to diapers, will buy the cheaper diapers instead of the cheaper food. amazon wanted diapers.com diapers.com said, we’re good this isn’t a billion dollar enterprise, but it pays the bills. amazon bought it after making sure they couldn’t actually use it to pay the bills.

znpy 2y ago

> With GitHub, TypeScript and VS code I'm probably using more Microsoft products than before. cool, how much money have you paid to Microsoft to use those? Except for Github (which they bought, by the way) probably not much. And github has some serious competitors (Gitlab which is just great and to a lesser extent, bitbucket).

linhns 2y ago
GitHub is still a lot better than GitLab. Nice CLI, simple user interface that's not a pain in the eye like what GitLab has.