Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What is wrong with Microsoft buying GitHub

jacquesmattheij.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 228 posts

Re: What is wrong with Microsoft buying GitHub

#211

Post by aphistic »

pritambaral wrote: post #170
_fwu1 wrote: post #106

Microsoft is not a company that ever contributed my life as a Linux user and open source contributor for years. In fact, it always made life harder for me. Here is a recent example; because Microsoft made a deal with Lenovo, now new Thinkpads are designed for just Windows. If you're a Linux user, good luck in your new adventure. People say "isn't it like IOS or Android?"; it's not. We had this freedom of using Linux,…

> because Microsoft made a deal with Lenovo, now new Thinkpads are designed for just Windows As a Linux on ThinkPad user, I'd be very interested to learn more about this.

Using Optimus is a horrible experience in Linux. I just turned off the discrete graphics because it was power hungry.

Re: What is wrong with Microsoft buying GitHub

#212

Post by pasbesoin »

pritambaral wrote: post #170
_fwu1 wrote: post #106

Microsoft is not a company that ever contributed my life as a Linux user and open source contributor for years. In fact, it always made life harder for me. Here is a recent example; because Microsoft made a deal with Lenovo, now new Thinkpads are designed for just Windows. If you're a Linux user, good luck in your new adventure. People say "isn't it like IOS or Android?"; it's not. We had this freedom of using Linux,…

> because Microsoft made a deal with Lenovo, now new Thinkpads are designed for just Windows As a Linux on ThinkPad user, I'd be very interested to learn more about this.

I'm not really the person to speak to this, but I haven't seen it mentioned, yet. Maybe someone more versed in the topic has something to say.

The Wikipedia article reads fairly neutral, e.g. 'Microsoft clarified...' Well, what I remember from that time, from the tech press (right or wrong/exagerated) was much more along the lines of 'Microsoft hacked a compromise in response to the increasing pressure of backlash' -- and this back and forth happening multiple times.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_In...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_In...

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/02/linus...

Re: What is wrong with Microsoft buying GitHub

#213

Post by lwhalen »

roadbeats wrote: post #146
raesene9 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know that Microsoft are the largest corporate contributor to open source projects on Github right?

I care about how much they respect freedom instead of how many lines of public code they shared. Technology can be bought or bruteforced, freedom can not.

Minor nit to pick, freedom can absolutely be both bought and brute-forced. We call them (less-relevant example in modern times) "buying yourself out of slavery" and (slightly more relevant) "war".

Re: What is wrong with Microsoft buying GitHub

#214

Post by OrderlyTiamat »

btschaegg wrote: post #167
Nullabillity wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone with any morals would never want to be associated with the Microsoft name, so anyone who does is untrustworthy by default. And besides, the current CEO was the one who went from Scroogled to mandatory telemetry, while focusing on renting out servers at a ridiculous markups. Don't forget the new focus on the Windows Store either. Or the locked-down ARM laptops. So it's not like the current management is innocen…

Anyone with any morals would never want to be associated with the Microsoft name, so anyone who does is untrustworthy by default. I'm not in the pro MS camp in this debate, but that sounds like a "no true scotsman" to me.

It's modus ponens, no logical fallacy here.

Re: What is wrong with Microsoft buying GitHub

#215

Post by jiojfwoswo »

gressquel wrote: post #43

I myself am optimistic but some few questrions popped up: Microsoft is very proactive removing things from azure and shutting down sites as soon as they receive DMCA complaint or abuse complaint. Are they going to remove important github repos like these if they get DMCA or other complaints? https://github.com/Roy47Zhang/CSGO-Aimbot-Project (cheat for Counter strike) https://github.com/rg3/youtube-dl (download from v…

[LAD] Github DCMA takedown notice - VeSTige header

https://lists.linuxaudio.org/archives/linux-audio-dev/2018-J...

Sadly, if they insist on this, it will only be trouble for opensource applications. Ardour, Qtractor, Carla, MusE, LMMS and others all use this vestige header... making it "illegal" would mean our beloved tools will simply drop VST support.

Re: What is wrong with Microsoft buying GitHub

#216

Post by setquk »

rcarmo wrote: post #187
setquk wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't buy the usability argument of WSL. The thing isn't anywhere near a useful Linux environment other than for some noddy stuff that cygwin can already handle. Try running a background process, a service, use a serial port or drag some half decent performance out of it and you'll see. It is ultimately backed with NTFS and NT's buffer cache. Running a VM is still several orders of magnitude more productive. And yo…

Serial ports work fine with my Arduinos. I regularly flash stuff using ESP tools from WSL.

Is this a recent change with 1803?

I was attempting to use AVR-gcc toolchain and some SCPI over serial stuff with WSL unsuccessfully.

Re: What is wrong with Microsoft buying GitHub

#217

Post by ringbugger »

raesene9 wrote: post #4

The idea that some companies must be forever tainted by their misdeads in the past seems odd to me. Companies change leadership, direction and style and it seems odd to suggest that there's some underlying quality which means that, regardless of that, you can never trust them (or in reverse that you should always trust a company you once trusted) There seems to be a trope with Microsoft that they're still the same co…

Take a look at recent technologies they tried to push. UWP for example. I don't see any change in direction here, to be honest. They try to lock-in developers on every step.

Many devs are looking elsewhere, so they paint themselves as having changed. And they did, to an extend. But you if they ever get in a position where they could reign in developers, you can count on it that they will try.

Re: What is wrong with Microsoft buying GitHub

#218

Post by nailer »

mpartel wrote: post #208
nailer wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A user that isn't the owner of the device - say a repair tech, but possibly a remote third party - installs an OS they trust, which scrapes all the device owners personal info and sends it to their server. The device owner may not ever become aware of this.

For the remote third party case, the option to unlock should be isolated from the OS so that it needs physical access (boot to bios/recovery mode). AIUI that's how it's typically implemented in Androids and in Secure Boot. The point about attackers with physical access is fair, though significantly mitigated on Androids (and Chromebooks I think) by a warning (of varying severity) that the OS has been modified. On my…

Yep. These are all fair points.

Re: What is wrong with Microsoft buying GitHub

#219

Post by Quarrelsome »

rbanffy wrote: post #110
Quarrelsome wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple store EULA agreement with developers is the most macabre and lengthy mis-spelling of the words: "fuck you". Its not a nice agreement.

Apple places users first, developers next, hardware makers (direct competitors) last. Microsoft places competitors (people who develop operating systems, databases, etc) on an entirely different list.

Apple shuts down hardware makers in the Apple eco-system aggressively and at least Microsoft usually has the manners to buy out the developers that makes things it likes and wants to integrate into its OS.

Re: What is wrong with Microsoft buying GitHub

#220

Post by fapjacks »

hobofan wrote: post #158
raesene9 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know that Microsoft are the largest corporate contributor to open source projects on Github right?

What are you basing this off? This article?[0] If so, then it only supports my shared belief with roadbeats that Microsoft out of most of those companies has had little impact on my life as an open source user. [0]: https://medium.freecodecamp.org/the-top-contributors-to-gith...

Little positive impact. Microsoft has shit on open source for years and had a negative impact on your life as an open source user. I know that you know this, just saying it for the sake of saying it.
Post reply on HN