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

Microsoft Open Source

opensource.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 36 posts

Re: Microsoft Open Source

#21

Post by nix23 »

nineteen999 wrote: post #16
nix23 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but on the other hand, did Microsoft any MIT/BSD Software at that time? I think it was especially against the GPL, but against a complete different Business model too.

> Did Microsoft any MIT/BSD Software at that time? Many of the TCP/IP utilities (telnet, nslookup etc) in earlier versions of Windows were based on BSD code.

I did not say they where allergic against free code/work, i said they where allergic against a complete different Business where you sell just the service and not the code.

EDIT: And i wrote "the made no mit/bsd code" but adapting it...just like Apple

Re: Microsoft Open Source

#22

Post by beagle3 »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #20
gregmorton wrote: post #7

Think you're old? I'm in my 50s and the only thing that will make me trust microshit is senility.

They should be trusted as much as any other large enterprise software developer. In other words not at all.

No, they deserve less trust than most other large enterprise software - most should not be trusted. Microsoft should be actively distrusted following their previous assaults on FOSS in general, open standards (web with IE6, ISO committee loading fiasco), FUD and mob tactics (they were collecting a few bucks for every android unit sold from manufacturers supposedly for patents - details never disclosed - and for all I know they still are). The Microsoft kiss of death (for those old enough to remember it) was strategy, not random happenstance.

Re: Microsoft Open Source

#23

Post by rudiv »

OnlyOneCannolo wrote: post #2

Any word on when we can host our own Windows Package Manager repositories?

They're implementing a very basic version of a package manager. There's a whole saga about the creation of that which you might also have seen, was on HN. (Called winget)

Edit: Just realized that's probably what you're referring to, didn't know they were officially calling it Windows Package Manager. I thought you were being sarcastic vis-a-vis the lack of a windows package manager.

Re: Microsoft Open Source

#24

Post by OnlyOneCannolo »

rudiv wrote: post #23
OnlyOneCannolo wrote: post #2

Any word on when we can host our own Windows Package Manager repositories?

They're implementing a very basic version of a package manager. There's a whole saga about the creation of that which you might also have seen, was on HN. (Called winget) Edit: Just realized that's probably what you're referring to, didn't know they were officially calling it Windows Package Manager. I thought you were being sarcastic vis-a-vis the lack of a windows package manager.

Haha I was in fact referring to WPM - the thing that winget gets from.

Re: Microsoft Open Source

#25

Post by greenleaf3 »

Cannot believe people bought this "Microsoft loves open source" advertisement. This is their PR stunt.

What are the famous Open Source projects they have released?

1. Typescript

2. VS code

3. .Net

Compare that to Google, Facebook, others. You will find how much Microsoft is really investing in Open Source projects.

Re: Microsoft Open Source

#26

Post by theandrewbailey »

greenleaf3 wrote: post #25

Cannot believe people bought this "Microsoft loves open source" advertisement. This is their PR stunt. What are the famous Open Source projects they have released? 1. Typescript 2. VS code 3. .Net Compare that to Google, Facebook, others. You will find how much Microsoft is really investing in Open Source projects.

Microsoft open sourcing .Net is not a PR stunt. It's like Sun open sourcing Java. I'm not sure what other big company open source projects you're thinking of that compare. Maybe Chrome, Electron, or React?

Re: Microsoft Open Source

#27

Post by coldtea »

greenleaf3 wrote: post #25

Cannot believe people bought this "Microsoft loves open source" advertisement. This is their PR stunt. What are the famous Open Source projects they have released? 1. Typescript 2. VS code 3. .Net Compare that to Google, Facebook, others. You will find how much Microsoft is really investing in Open Source projects.

Why should they?

And why should we compare? It's not a pissing contest...

Re: Microsoft Open Source

#28

Post by ItsJason »

pydry wrote: post #19
kanobo wrote: post #3

I don't know about you youngsters, but I'm in my thirties and it's amazing to watch Microsoft evolve since the 90s. As a teenager I would never have imagined the words 'Open Source' would ever be in a tag on a Microsoft-branded website.

I'm in my thirties too and I'm not at all amazed by the way MS evolved. The three MS open source offerings I have tried where MS has something that resembles a non open source competitor - Azure MySQL, Azure Postgres and WSL are all horrendously slow (I'd go as far as to say deliberately crippled). It's a trap. Every time they've released something big as open source or on Linux (e.g. .NET/vscode) it's been something…

Can confirm; tried to use Azure PG in a project at work and we were shocked at the terrible performance. It was basically unusable. This was < 1 year ago.

Re: Microsoft Open Source

#29

Post by solarkraft »

mhh__ wrote: post #12
gregmorton wrote: post #7

Think you're old? I'm in my 50s and the only thing that will make me trust microshit is senility.

Trust but verify, as the saying goes. I'm not that worried in the long-ish term about microsoft, but I worry that the new generation (my generation) have grown up post GPL in that there is an open source tool for everything now but generally under a corporate-friendly license - I worry the pendulum will swing back the other way.

> I worry the pendulum will swing back the other way

So do I, but only moderately so. They're using open source projects to smuggle in proprietary things in their official builds (VSCode), collect data (dotnet telemetry) and get people into their proprietary offerings (Azure, LiveShare).

This is arguably not very nice, but the business case is obvious and they're pretty much only doing the same thing as the other big players. Additionally, since the core offerings really are open, people are free to build more user friendly versions of them (VScodium).

Strategically I think they're slowly entering the "Extend" phase. Let's not let them extinguish, ie don't start depending on their proprietary offerings. Getting it into peoples' heads probably requires EEE education.

Re: Microsoft Open Source

#30

Post by fizixer »

gregmorton wrote: post #7

Think you're old? I'm in my 50s and the only thing that will make me trust microshit is senility.

Micro$hit keeps getting baffled at how ea$y it is to turn around the opinion of majority of developers by thinking of them as salivating dogs and throwing them bone$ like 'M$ open $ource' and 'M$ love$ linux' and making parts of V$Code open $ource.
Post reply on HN