4 ms·

Side note. One of the advantages of using proprietary packaged software is supposed to be a unified support and product. In this case the maintainer redirects

Side note. One of the advantages of using proprietary packaged software is supposed to be a unified support and product. In this case the maintainer redirects the issue to some other team and passes the ball as if it were an open source project with 50 dependencies with thin responsibilities "no, if there's an issue with a button, you should report it to GUI-button, we do GUI-form and we just pass the button generation to their library"

RajT88 1y ago
Microsoft is a many headed beast. Finding the right contact even for employees inside the beast is challenging and a skill all its own.
- nottorp 1y ago
  I'm more used to hear this kind of 'it's not our fault' crap from state bureaucracies not companies that want me to pay them...
  - msk-lywenn 1y ago
    When a company has its street named after themselves and a fleet of buses to carry employees to the company, one can start considering Microsoft as a state with all the necessary bureaucracy.
    - immibis 1y ago
      Large enough companies are states - period. Apple is a state. So was Standard Oil.
    - eptcyka 1y ago
      Bureaucracy sets in before statehood.
  - Uvix 1y ago
    For stuff where they take money, like Azure, Microsoft has clearer lines of support. .NET and Windows are loss leaders.
  - cjbgkagh 1y ago
    Large companies are the same for the same reasons, the relationship between you paying them and their personal benefit is so incredibly remote that it might as well not exist.
  - hbn 1y ago
    Microsoft is long past the point of realizing they don't need to make their product good to keep users. Everyone who uses Windows is stuck using it because of software lock-in, or it's what's on the laptop their job provides, or because they can't afford a Mac. Outside of niche communities, there aren't a lot of "Windows fans" out there these days. They'll gladly harvest your data whether you like them or not!
    - volemo 1y ago
      > because they can't afford a Mac Ha, as if the situation with macOS is much better? The OS space is a (lopsided) duopoly, both Microsoft and Apple know it and have pulled down their sleeves long ago.
      - hbn 1y ago
        Yes, I have years of experience with both and macOS is way less of a user-hostile experience. People buy Apple products because they like them.
        nottorp 1y ago
        Because they like them better than Windows actually. They're both crap, Apple is less crap. This post typed on a macbook pro.
        RajT88 1y ago
        Some people buy Apple products because they have succeeded in making it a minor status symbol. It's interesting, because one symbol is wealth (Apple devices cost more), but the other is a symbol of being a creative professional. I would describe myself via metaphor: the redneck who likes to race cars, and doesn't care about the car as long as it has most of its wheels, and he'll drive the hell out of it.
  - RajT88 1y ago
    I am sorry if it sounded like I was suggesting it was not their fault. I was simply stating fact, without any particular opinions on the matter of fault.
- wat10000 1y ago
  Which is exactly why the employees need to be the ones shepherding these reports to the right place.
- TZubiri 1y ago
  Yup, definitely has felt that way for years, they do try to consolidate but it takes years. When I was trying to setup something for customer support I was navigating all of their redundant products, Teams, Skype, Skype for Business (different thing), Lync. But that is way more normal for microsoft, because it's about redundant products that get merged eventually. What's not typical is internal dependencies being exposed, the case above were many MSFT teams/products in the same tier, the case in this article is many MSFT teams/products in a single vertical, at different tiers of the supply chain. It's possible that this is more a feature of open source, this being an open source MSFT product (.NET core) and the report having been filed through an open source channel (github issues). I think that if the issue were submitted to some account manager or customer service rep through a channel linked to a paying customer account, the response would have been very different. But you cannot expect a quality customer service response if there's no $ being paid to the maintainers. Whether it be Microsoft or whatever FOSS project.
MarkSweep 1y ago
The maintainer is not a Microsoft employee. For what that’s worth.
II2II 1y ago
The buck is passed all of the time, it simply happens internally and out of sight of the customer. In this case, it looks like an open source component managed by a commercial company. They could do everything out of sight, but the open source world also encourages transparency.
- wat10000 1y ago
  It's easy to have both transparency and proper handling. "Thank you for the report. This issue is actually in the underlying Whatever library. I've passed it along to that team."
- cjbgkagh 1y ago
  I think a big part of the transparency was to help clean up this very mess, motivate developers to do the right thing or face public ridicule. The public is not in any org chain, we don’t get performance bonuses, we’re not incentivized to hide issues from upper management, it is very much the opposite. Having this out of band communication is incredibly valuable and helps keep the reporting chain honest. Someone somewhere inside MS will use this example in an effort to fix the process, much easier to say 30 random internet people with no motivation the lie or collude all agree that this is unacceptable than to say “I think this is unacceptable”.
- TZubiri 1y ago
  Right, as a customer you always prefer that it happen out of sight, but I guess these are the very tradeoffs of choosing open source software, you can't get the best of both worlds. That said, maybe a slight change like, "I'll open a ticket with the other team" instead of "you should open a ticket with the other team" makes all the difference. But like I said in another comment, if you open a ticket on github, you aren't paying for that support, you should aim to have a commercial relationship with Microsoft and then raise the issue through that commercial channel. Otherwise you have no recourse to complain, you are getting everything as-is.

RajT88 1y ago

Microsoft is a many headed beast. Finding the right contact even for employees inside the beast is challenging and a skill all its own.

nottorp 1y ago
I'm more used to hear this kind of 'it's not our fault' crap from state bureaucracies not companies that want me to pay them...
- msk-lywenn 1y ago
  When a company has its street named after themselves and a fleet of buses to carry employees to the company, one can start considering Microsoft as a state with all the necessary bureaucracy.
  - immibis 1y ago
    Large enough companies are states - period. Apple is a state. So was Standard Oil.
  - eptcyka 1y ago
    Bureaucracy sets in before statehood.
- Uvix 1y ago
  For stuff where they take money, like Azure, Microsoft has clearer lines of support. .NET and Windows are loss leaders.
- cjbgkagh 1y ago
  Large companies are the same for the same reasons, the relationship between you paying them and their personal benefit is so incredibly remote that it might as well not exist.
- hbn 1y ago
  Microsoft is long past the point of realizing they don't need to make their product good to keep users. Everyone who uses Windows is stuck using it because of software lock-in, or it's what's on the laptop their job provides, or because they can't afford a Mac. Outside of niche communities, there aren't a lot of "Windows fans" out there these days. They'll gladly harvest your data whether you like them or not!
  - volemo 1y ago
    > because they can't afford a Mac Ha, as if the situation with macOS is much better? The OS space is a (lopsided) duopoly, both Microsoft and Apple know it and have pulled down their sleeves long ago.
    - hbn 1y ago
      Yes, I have years of experience with both and macOS is way less of a user-hostile experience. People buy Apple products because they like them.
      - nottorp 1y ago
        Because they like them better than Windows actually. They're both crap, Apple is less crap. This post typed on a macbook pro.
      - RajT88 1y ago
        Some people buy Apple products because they have succeeded in making it a minor status symbol. It's interesting, because one symbol is wealth (Apple devices cost more), but the other is a symbol of being a creative professional. I would describe myself via metaphor: the redneck who likes to race cars, and doesn't care about the car as long as it has most of its wheels, and he'll drive the hell out of it.
- RajT88 1y ago
  I am sorry if it sounded like I was suggesting it was not their fault. I was simply stating fact, without any particular opinions on the matter of fault.
wat10000 1y ago
Which is exactly why the employees need to be the ones shepherding these reports to the right place.
TZubiri 1y ago
Yup, definitely has felt that way for years, they do try to consolidate but it takes years. When I was trying to setup something for customer support I was navigating all of their redundant products, Teams, Skype, Skype for Business (different thing), Lync. But that is way more normal for microsoft, because it's about redundant products that get merged eventually. What's not typical is internal dependencies being exposed, the case above were many MSFT teams/products in the same tier, the case in this article is many MSFT teams/products in a single vertical, at different tiers of the supply chain. It's possible that this is more a feature of open source, this being an open source MSFT product (.NET core) and the report having been filed through an open source channel (github issues). I think that if the issue were submitted to some account manager or customer service rep through a channel linked to a paying customer account, the response would have been very different. But you cannot expect a quality customer service response if there's no $ being paid to the maintainers. Whether it be Microsoft or whatever FOSS project.

MarkSweep 1y ago

The maintainer is not a Microsoft employee. For what that’s worth.

II2II 1y ago

The buck is passed all of the time, it simply happens internally and out of sight of the customer. In this case, it looks like an open source component managed by a commercial company. They could do everything out of sight, but the open source world also encourages transparency.

wat10000 1y ago
It's easy to have both transparency and proper handling. "Thank you for the report. This issue is actually in the underlying Whatever library. I've passed it along to that team."
cjbgkagh 1y ago
I think a big part of the transparency was to help clean up this very mess, motivate developers to do the right thing or face public ridicule. The public is not in any org chain, we don’t get performance bonuses, we’re not incentivized to hide issues from upper management, it is very much the opposite. Having this out of band communication is incredibly valuable and helps keep the reporting chain honest. Someone somewhere inside MS will use this example in an effort to fix the process, much easier to say 30 random internet people with no motivation the lie or collude all agree that this is unacceptable than to say “I think this is unacceptable”.
TZubiri 1y ago
Right, as a customer you always prefer that it happen out of sight, but I guess these are the very tradeoffs of choosing open source software, you can't get the best of both worlds. That said, maybe a slight change like, "I'll open a ticket with the other team" instead of "you should open a ticket with the other team" makes all the difference. But like I said in another comment, if you open a ticket on github, you aren't paying for that support, you should aim to have a commercial relationship with Microsoft and then raise the issue through that commercial channel. Otherwise you have no recourse to complain, you are getting everything as-is.