The Day AppGet Died
291–300 of 566 posts
Re: The Day AppGet Died
#292Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do realize that Microsoft Word has been on the Mac since 1985 suite and even the first Microsoft Flight Simulator was on the Apple II? Also Applesoft basic was derived from Microsoft basic? Yes, they did copy the operating system but that doesn't mean that the Mac Platform is unimportant to them.
Microsoft buying a big chunk of Apple (admittedly to stave off antitrust claims that there was no competition in the OS market) is a major reason Apple is alive today.
On the other hand, Apple unintentionally granting a perpetual license on their interpretation of the WIMP GUI (admittedly not without perusing the look-and-feel lawsuit) is what kept Microsoft in the OS business.
Re: The Day AppGet Died
#293It's understandable that everybody is blaming Microsoft for the way this was handled. But let's remember that we are only seeing one side of this story, we don't know what really went on from Microsoft and the team's side there.
Re: The Day AppGet Died
#294It's really shameful how a prestigious service like AppGet for neglected Windows users got screwed by Microsoft. My sincere thoughts are with kayone and AppGet.
Re: The Day AppGet Died
#295I feel bad for the OP for getting ghosted by the Microsoft hiring process, I'd at least want a prompt response of _some_ kind; but the package manager features OP says are "copied" are common to cocoapods, homebrew, and others... Winget is certainly not the first, and probably won't be the last package manager to take that tack, so I don't find that appeal terribly compelling (The bad hiring process though... That's annoying). If winget is a "copy" of appget, it doesn't look like a very _good_ or _complete_ one at a glance, so the author could probably keep at appget, what with the publicity; winget doesn't even uninstall or upgrade packages (yet, at least), so it's just a glorified search bar strapped to msiexec (not to lessen anyone's effort or plans, software takes a lot of time and effort to build).
If the JS package manager scene has taught me anything, it's that so long as one another's manifests/registries are readable, developers will happily try multiple programs which actually do the managing, and, to some degree, a little competition is what actually makes things gradually improve. I, at least, hadn't heard of appget prior to today. (Just chocolatey and oneget, both of which I'd used, both of which are likewise "invalidated" by winget, but persist regardless.) But I can only reasonably consider it if its primary maintainer reconsiders its "dead" status.
Re: The Day AppGet Died
#296Earlier quoted context omitted.
Calling it "WinGet" was the real punch in the gut. Does Microsoft select for assholes or something? There's a thousand other package manager names [1] in the wild and they chose that one. So much for "developers, developers, developers"... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_software_package_manag...
In all fairness: - "NuGet" is super-popular in .NET circles (included in Visual Studio by default) - "apt-get" is the classic tool for Windows Subsystem for Linux So "WinGet" certainly "makes sense" as a name without being a direct ripoff of AppGet
Wait! apt-get is not Microsoft's invention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APT_(software)
Re: The Day AppGet Died
#297Every time I see the “Microsoft <3 open source” stuff I get really suspicious, and this kinda confirms that I’m right to be. I’m grateful of their more open culture these days (dotnet alone is a big achievement) ... but I feel like there’s been a number of incidents like these which snap me back to reality and remind me they’re really just paying lip service to the idea and don’t truly buy into open source.
Microsoft is a public traded company. You can safely assume that anything they do is really about generating value for shareholders. Of course they don't "love open source". But they probably love what it does for them (e.g. enable them to run Azure).
Re: The Day AppGet Died
#298Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not disagreeing with you, but I think it's better to make it a little bit more clear what exactly was copied. Reading the article mentioned in the OP, the main selling point for appget seems to be that the packages are written in yaml: > Do you want to know how Microsoft WinGet works? go read the article ( https://keivan.io/appget-what-chocolatey-wasnt/ ) But that alone doesn't particularly strike me as a completely…
He's not claiming that his approach was "completely novel". He's claiming microsoft identified his way, that already existed, was the way they wanted to go, toyed with bringing him in to run it and then got overwhelmed by internal Not Invented Here / We Can Do It Better and threw him under the bus. It's literally the new cuddly microsoft Embracing, Extending and Extinguishing this guy's work.
You are a small Team in a big company.
Your job is to create an App Manager.
There is already a code base under a MIT license.
You use it.
I'm not seeing the issue.
Re: The Day AppGet Died
#299This is why I personally am very reluctant to the sharing of well founded ideas on platforms such as github, in hackathons, in competitions, in recorded speeches etc. How unlikely it may seem, this is a great example that ideas with traction do get picked up and copied, and the originator screwed over. I honestly sometimes feel as if the openness is pushed and saluted, but with the ulterior motive to skim for ideas.
Edit: corrected autocorrect