3 ms·
Is it just me or is Microsoft really phoning it in recently?
by AustinDev 8mo ago
Is it just me or is Microsoft really phoning it in recently?
- PlatoIsADisease 8mo agoTheir software seems like it. Their sales team is brutal.
- VerifiedReports 8mo agoRecently? They've been shipping absolute trash for 15 years, and still haven't reached the bottom apparently.
- reppap 8mo agoAzure keeps randomly breaking our resources without any service health notifications or heads up, it's very fun living in microsofts world.
- my_throwaway23 8mo agoTo be fair, Windows 7 was quite good in my opinion. Wait, what year is it?
- ReptileMan 8mo agowindows 2000 server and windows 2003 server were their last great desktop OSs
- my_throwaway23 8mo agoYes, but they're close to 10 years old at this point. 10? 10.
- orphea 8mo ago.NET is actually, unironically good. But yes, this is one of few exceptions, unfortunately.
- jlarocco 8mo agoI have mixed feelings about .Net. I think C# and .Net are objectively better to use than Java or C++. But the tooling and documentation is kind of a mess. Do you build with the "dotnet" command, or the "msbuild" command? When should you prefer "nuget restore" over "dotnet restore"? Should you put "<RestorePackagesConfig>true</RestorePackagesConfig>" in the .csproj instead? What's the difference between a reference and using Nuget to install a package? What's the difference between "Framework" and "Core"? Why, in 2026, do I still need to tell it not to prefer 32-bit binaries? It's getting better, but there's still 20 years of documentation, how-to articles, StackOverflow Q&A, blogs, and books telling you to do old, broken, and out of date stuff, and finding good information about the specific version you're using can be difficult. Admittedly, my perspective is skewed because I had never used C# and .Net before jumping in to a large .Net Framework project with hundreds of sub-projects developed over 15-20 years.
- VerifiedReports 8mo agoBut .Net goes back way farther than 15 years. I attended one of the evangelist roadshows Microsoft put on when they announced .Net, back in the late '90s. We were developing Windows applications and using an SQL Server/ASP back-end. We walked out of there saying WTF WAS all that? It was terribly communicated. The departing attendees were shaking their heads in bafflement. I'm impressed that it has stood the test of time and seems to be well-done; I've never had occasion to use it. But man... that stupid name.
- mrweasel 8mo agoThinking back, you're probably correct, but it seems like they where actively trying to create something good back then. That might just be me only seeing the good parts, with .Net and SQLServer. Azure was never good, and we've know why for over a decade, their working conditions suck and people don't stay long, resulting things being held together by duct tape. I do think some things in Microsoft ecosystem are salvageable, they just aren't trendy. The Windows kernel can still work, .Net and their C++ runtime, Win32 / Winforms, ActiveDirectory, Exchange (on-prem) and Office are all still fixable and will last Microsoft a long time. It's just boring, and Microsoft apparently won't do it, because: No subscription.
- dotancohen 8mo agoYou must be new here. Microsoft notoriously tolerated pirated Windows and Office installations for about a decade and a half, to solidify their usage as de facto standard and expected. Tolerating unofficial free usage of their latest products is standard procedure for MS.
- falloutx 8mo agoBy recently, you mean since 2007
- Ygg2 8mo agoBy recently I assume they mean since Windows 7. Alternatively since Windows 10. 2009-2015. Last decade it was misstep after misstep.