Detailed thoughts on the State of the .NET Foundation • Hacker News Board

Re: Detailed thoughts on the State of the .NET Foundation

#61

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Oct 17, 2021, 9:47 PM UTC

schoen wrote: post #58

tpmx wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since you specifically ask: I would probably respect them more if they had joined Apple. I think it's obvious that the bar is noticably higher there. Of course, this is all based on whether they actually thought about it strategically before deciding to go with C#. Perhaps they were thinking they'd get larger roles at Microsoft, perhaps they didn't think about it all and Microsoft was the most direct option due the t…

On the other hand, Apple ended up finding more success with "embrace and extend" than Microsoft did. So much so that when you go to most free software conferences, well, back when in-person conferences still happened, most of the developers are running and writing free software on Apple's proprietary operating system.

[deleted]

Re: Detailed thoughts on the State of the .NET Foundation

#62

Post by ethbr0 » Sun, Oct 17, 2021, 9:49 PM UTC

jrm4 wrote: post #54

amyjess wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Miguel and Nat have, ever since the early '00s, been enthusiastic supporters of Microsoft technology and have spent this century doing little other than enabling Microsoft tech to play well with open source. The takeaways from this are: 1. This is likely a lifelong dream for them. I'm not comfortable with shitting on people's lifelong dreams. 2. I definitely saw it coming. As soon as I saw Microsoft acquired Xamarin…

I think it's possible to find an effort both noble and foolish, which is exactly where I am here. I love that they thought they could shift Microsoft in a better direction, and hoped that they could succeed; but nevertheless was nearly 100% sure that it would never really happen.

You're nearly 100% certain that enabling Microsoft tech to play well with open source would never happen?

... It's already happened.

And it's the only reason Azure isn't already dead, and that Microsoft's market share and stock price haven't cratered.

Re: Detailed thoughts on the State of the .NET Foundation

#63

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Oct 17, 2021, 9:51 PM UTC

dleslie wrote: post #22

sneak wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Carmack going to Facebook is the one that got me. Somehow Rob Pike and Guido at Google didn't, even though they are pretty close to Microsoft-equivalent these days.

id Software going to Bethesda.

[deleted]

Re: Detailed thoughts on the State of the .NET Foundation

#64

Post by ethbr0 » Sun, Oct 17, 2021, 9:59 PM UTC

ozim wrote: post #51

encryptluks2 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To Microsoft. You're basically becoming a slave by joining the foundation, agreeing to have them own your projects.

If you go this way, why even bother with whole .NET ecosystem? It is all Microsoft. It would be easier to go with Python/Ruby maybe Java.

Going Java and dealing with Oracle is easier than .NET and Microsoft?

Re: Detailed thoughts on the State of the .NET Foundation

#65

Post by jrm4 » Sun, Oct 17, 2021, 10:03 PM UTC

ethbr0 wrote: post #62

jrm4 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's possible to find an effort both noble and foolish, which is exactly where I am here. I love that they thought they could shift Microsoft in a better direction, and hoped that they could succeed; but nevertheless was nearly 100% sure that it would never really happen.

You're nearly 100% certain that enabling Microsoft tech to play well with open source would never happen? ... It's already happened. And it's the only reason Azure isn't already dead, and that Microsoft's market share and stock price haven't cratered.

We are working with very different definitions of "play well with open source;" Mine favors the ideals of free and open source software and doesn't really care much either way what happens to MS.

Re: Detailed thoughts on the State of the .NET Foundation

#66

Post by cassepipe » Sun, Oct 17, 2021, 10:04 PM UTC

corpMaverick wrote: post #50

tpmx wrote: post #20

I may be an out of touch old-timer but I still find it kinda sad and weird that Miguel and Nat, both of them heroes of mine in the early 2000s now work for Microsoft.

I looked up to Miguel in the 1990s. But him and his father ended up supporting the current president of Mexico. Who is a demagogue with kleptomaniac tendencies.

Yeah well the whatever you think of the current president he did represent change in a country that has seen presidents from the same party for 70, and the president before him too. And the ones from the PAN weren't exactly great. At least that one seemed to be back by a democratic movement/hope. Can't blame them for that when you know the history of the country.

Re: Detailed thoughts on the State of the .NET Foundation

#67

Post by ethbr0 » Sun, Oct 17, 2021, 10:04 PM UTC

jrm4 wrote: post #65

ethbr0 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're nearly 100% certain that enabling Microsoft tech to play well with open source would never happen? ... It's already happened. And it's the only reason Azure isn't already dead, and that Microsoft's market share and stock price haven't cratered.

We are working with very different definitions of "play well with open source;" Mine favors the ideals of free and open source software and doesn't really care much either way what happens to MS.

Do you remember Microsoft of the 90s?

Re: Detailed thoughts on the State of the .NET Foundation

#68

Post by booleandilemma » Sun, Oct 17, 2021, 10:14 PM UTC

So how is what Microsoft is doing with .NET any different than what Google is doing with Go and Oracle with Java?

Is this people unfairly hating on Microsoft for being Microsoft?

Is .NET any less open source than Go or Java (or any other technology with corporate backing)?

Re: Detailed thoughts on the State of the .NET Foundation

#69

Post by mkr-hn » Sun, Oct 17, 2021, 10:14 PM UTC

ethbr0 wrote: post #62

jrm4 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's possible to find an effort both noble and foolish, which is exactly where I am here. I love that they thought they could shift Microsoft in a better direction, and hoped that they could succeed; but nevertheless was nearly 100% sure that it would never really happen.

You're nearly 100% certain that enabling Microsoft tech to play well with open source would never happen? ... It's already happened. And it's the only reason Azure isn't already dead, and that Microsoft's market share and stock price haven't cratered.

Loading up a local instance of a user-friendly CMS to wget mirror for a static site inside an Ubuntu terminal from the Windows store is still a surreal experience.

Re: Detailed thoughts on the State of the .NET Foundation

#70

Post by copperx » Sun, Oct 17, 2021, 10:19 PM UTC

corpMaverick wrote: post #50

tpmx wrote: post #20

I may be an out of touch old-timer but I still find it kinda sad and weird that Miguel and Nat, both of them heroes of mine in the early 2000s now work for Microsoft.

I looked up to Miguel in the 1990s. But him and his father ended up supporting the current president of Mexico. Who is a demagogue with kleptomaniac tendencies.

I think it's not smart to look down on someone for their political or religious views. There are many many issues in play. For example, how do you know he didn't support the president because of the change and ideals he represented, like many Mexicans did, and not his actual performance?

Check you own biases.