4 ms·

I agree with spoiledtechie that C# is a nice programming language. Recent versions enable very concise higher-order functional (=fun) code to be written. The ge

by friism 18y ago

I agree with spoiledtechie that C# is a nice programming language. Recent versions enable very concise higher-order functional (=fun) code to be written. The generics implementation has few warts and tooling is good. Another gem is SQL Server, even the Express version is fast and has solid backup-restore features. Powershell provides a (still somewhat embryonic) scripting environment. One nuisance is the relative dearth of free-free software. The thinking seems to go, that because MS gets money, then so should developers of small utils and such. It gives the entire ecosystem a slightly different feel, and you often find yourself paying $10 or similar for small, almost-trivial add-ons, that would have been free on other platforms where a tradition of sharing for the good of all is the norm (codeplex -- I think -- have helped in this regard).

BrandonWatson 18y ago
This is a very interesting point...do you have any suggestion for the types of tools that you would want to see be free which aren't? Would contests from MSFT help in this regard? What kind of investment could they make on this problem which would resonate with this audience?
- friism 18y ago
  The MVP programme is highly regarded, I think -- perhaps that could be be amended to celebrate open source contributions to a wider degree or a parallel programme established. Codeplex and Microsoft releasing open source code in general (eg. Oxite) probably helps too. Microsoft engineers openly working on projects not originating at MS (FacebookToolkit, say) might be a welcome move too.
- arebop 18y ago
  Until Windows is a free platform, I think you'll always find that it's relatively difficult to find, use, and develop free software there and that the users of the platform will tend to be people who care less about free software. Having said that, things would be better for free software contributors and users if Microsoft were merely passively uninterested in software freedom. I think the first thing for them to do is to stop actively opposing the free software community. Microsoft has repeatedly attacked free software projects on the .NET platform, from NUnit to NAnt to NDoc, by launching alternatives with few or no technical advantages. This not only destroys momentum, but it strengthens the cultural tendency among Microsoft customers to distrust anything that does not originate in Redmond. Lately Microsoft has released some of their software under liberal licensing terms. I think this won't help much, so long as they discourage and hamper participation beyond consumption by members of the public.
tristian 18y ago
I don't find this at all. Most of the .Net tools and things I use are free and open source: NHibernate, Rhino.Mocks, NUnit, CruiseControl.Net, NAnt, Wix, Windsor, Quartz, log4net. Admittedly good profilers aren't free, and nor is the obligatory ReSharper. But for the most part all the extra utilities and things I've needed are readily available and open source.

by friism 18y ago

BrandonWatson 18y ago

This is a very interesting point...do you have any suggestion for the types of tools that you would want to see be free which aren't? Would contests from MSFT help in this regard? What kind of investment could they make on this problem which would resonate with this audience?

friism 18y ago
The MVP programme is highly regarded, I think -- perhaps that could be be amended to celebrate open source contributions to a wider degree or a parallel programme established. Codeplex and Microsoft releasing open source code in general (eg. Oxite) probably helps too. Microsoft engineers openly working on projects not originating at MS (FacebookToolkit, say) might be a welcome move too.
arebop 18y ago
Until Windows is a free platform, I think you'll always find that it's relatively difficult to find, use, and develop free software there and that the users of the platform will tend to be people who care less about free software. Having said that, things would be better for free software contributors and users if Microsoft were merely passively uninterested in software freedom. I think the first thing for them to do is to stop actively opposing the free software community. Microsoft has repeatedly attacked free software projects on the .NET platform, from NUnit to NAnt to NDoc, by launching alternatives with few or no technical advantages. This not only destroys momentum, but it strengthens the cultural tendency among Microsoft customers to distrust anything that does not originate in Redmond. Lately Microsoft has released some of their software under liberal licensing terms. I think this won't help much, so long as they discourage and hamper participation beyond consumption by members of the public.

tristian 18y ago

I don't find this at all. Most of the .Net tools and things I use are free and open source: NHibernate, Rhino.Mocks, NUnit, CruiseControl.Net, NAnt, Wix, Windsor, Quartz, log4net. Admittedly good profilers aren't free, and nor is the obligatory ReSharper. But for the most part all the extra utilities and things I've needed are readily available and open source.