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

The best Parts of Visual Studio Code are proprietary

underjord.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 277 posts

Re: The best Parts of Visual Studio Code are proprietary

#21

Post by ponker »

skohan wrote: post #7

I can be counted as one of the skeptics of MS's open-source efforts. It just seems to me that MS's history and recent investment in open-source puts us in a quantum state between two possibilities: 1. MS has changed their ways, and has become an altruist organization which just wants to give developers things of value for free so they might hopefully choose Azure when they decide what cloud provider to run on. 2. MS…

I think it's 3. MS realized that it's not as powerful as it was in the 80s and 90s because Apple and Google took over a huge portion of the computing market with mobile. So they have "changed their ways," not because of any altruism but because they have to change their ways to compete from a position that, while enviably strong, is also a laggard especially on the consumer and developer side of the business.

Re: The best Parts of Visual Studio Code are proprietary

#22

Post by saagarjha »

skrebbel wrote: post #17
skohan wrote: post #7

I can be counted as one of the skeptics of MS's open-source efforts. It just seems to me that MS's history and recent investment in open-source puts us in a quantum state between two possibilities: 1. MS has changed their ways, and has become an altruist organization which just wants to give developers things of value for free so they might hopefully choose Azure when they decide what cloud provider to run on. 2. MS…

How is Sublime Text more open? It's closed source.

I don’t think Package Control prevents you from downloading its extensions and using it with another editor.

Re: The best Parts of Visual Studio Code are proprietary

#23

Post by sjellis »

skohan wrote: post #7

I can be counted as one of the skeptics of MS's open-source efforts. It just seems to me that MS's history and recent investment in open-source puts us in a quantum state between two possibilities: 1. MS has changed their ways, and has become an altruist organization which just wants to give developers things of value for free so they might hopefully choose Azure when they decide what cloud provider to run on. 2. MS…

I would say that it can be both. Large organizations like Microsoft have so many different people and teams that there isn't necessarily a group-think. On the contrary, different teams will have different priorities, and keeping people aligned is a really hard job.

The thing that bothers me about Visual Studio Code is that does conform to the general Microsoft rule of enabling telemetry by default. IMO, this is not good practice, and in some cases it seems to have been encouraged or mandated at a senior level. We should not have aggressive data collection in the world's standard desktop OS, or compilers baking vendor instrumentation into C++ binaries by default.

Re: The best Parts of Visual Studio Code are proprietary

#24

Post by rubber_duck »

> It also frustrates me that this prevents someone from building a compatible plugin for VIM or any other editor. This would be much more powerful if it could be in all the IntelliJs as well.

VS Code implementation could be used to implement VIM because VIM can use language server infrastructure etc. IntelliJ would be a game changer for me but Microsoft OSS-ing their implementation would have 0 impact on this - IntelliJ uses their own language analysis infrastructure, FS, etc. and they shown no interest in using language server protocol.

Re: The best Parts of Visual Studio Code are proprietary

#25

Post by sentient_devil »

sudhirj wrote: post #3

Yes and no. The complaint is that some widely used extensions are proprietary. If these extensions require MS servers, then they have every reason to be. Even if they don't, there's nothing wrong with a company holding back some stuff they consider strategic, they're not obligated to release them. If we're debating the OSS credentials of VSCode, it'll need to be based on the code already released (which makes it a pr…

If me using a remote session on one of my servers requires microsoft servers, that itself is skeptical enough.

Re: The best Parts of Visual Studio Code are proprietary

#26

Post by strombofulous »

sudhirj wrote: post #3

Yes and no. The complaint is that some widely used extensions are proprietary. If these extensions require MS servers, then they have every reason to be. Even if they don't, there's nothing wrong with a company holding back some stuff they consider strategic, they're not obligated to release them. If we're debating the OSS credentials of VSCode, it'll need to be based on the code already released (which makes it a pr…

How are they closed source? Aren't they javascript?

Re: The best Parts of Visual Studio Code are proprietary

#28

Post by tenuousemphasis »

toadi wrote: post #9
Dylan16807 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? The developers at microsoft get paid no matter how the company licenses things.

Huh, where is the companies money coming from ?

1. Azure public cloud, Windows Server, SQL Server, GitHub and enterprise services ($13.4b) 2. Windows, search, Surface and Xbox ($12.9b) 3. Office, Dynamics and LinkedIn ($11.7b)

Re: The best Parts of Visual Studio Code are proprietary

#29

Post by skohan »

skrebbel wrote: post #17
skohan wrote: post #7

I can be counted as one of the skeptics of MS's open-source efforts. It just seems to me that MS's history and recent investment in open-source puts us in a quantum state between two possibilities: 1. MS has changed their ways, and has become an altruist organization which just wants to give developers things of value for free so they might hopefully choose Azure when they decide what cloud provider to run on. 2. MS…

How is Sublime Text more open? It's closed source.

Thanks for the correction, I have updated my post. The more relevant point is that Sublime Text is a less corporate alternative.

Re: The best Parts of Visual Studio Code are proprietary

#30

Post by nix23 »

strombofulous wrote: post #26
sudhirj wrote: post #3

Yes and no. The complaint is that some widely used extensions are proprietary. If these extensions require MS servers, then they have every reason to be. Even if they don't, there's nothing wrong with a company holding back some stuff they consider strategic, they're not obligated to release them. If we're debating the OSS credentials of VSCode, it'll need to be based on the code already released (which makes it a pr…

How are they closed source? Aren't they javascript?

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/javascript-trap.html
Post reply on HN