151–160 of 267 posts
Of course Julia was behind the removal of it. I'm so glad I'm not at Microsoft anymore. Her decisions might be great for Microsoft's profit margins, but my god does she hate people getting "stuff for free"
Of course Julia was behind the removal of it. I'm so glad I'm not at Microsoft anymore. Her decisions might be great for Microsoft's profit margins, but my god does she hate people getting "stuff for free"
Julia White doesn't work at Microsoft anymore - she works at SAP. Or did you mean Julia Liuson ?
This feels more like an internal turf war inside Microsoft. The general open source strategy with .NET Core and VS Code has been running long enough that I don't think it's just a smoke screen. But there's probably plenty of different interests inside Microsoft that are at least partially in conflict. The Azure side probably doesn't care about selling Visual Studio, but they care about developer mindshare and reputat…
There are people on record that it was the Azure division head Scott Guthrie who gave permission to open source ASP.NET Core (which at the time was part of Azure). Later the asp.net team merged with the .net team and brought the open sourcing with them. VS has no place anymore. The velocity and mindshare is with VS Code. VS with its visual designers had its place .. but desktop is dead and Xamarin competes with frame…
This feels more like an internal turf war inside Microsoft. The general open source strategy with .NET Core and VS Code has been running long enough that I don't think it's just a smoke screen. But there's probably plenty of different interests inside Microsoft that are at least partially in conflict. The Azure side probably doesn't care about selling Visual Studio, but they care about developer mindshare and reputat…
There are people on record that it was the Azure division head Scott Guthrie who gave permission to open source ASP.NET Core (which at the time was part of Azure). Later the asp.net team merged with the .net team and brought the open sourcing with them. VS has no place anymore. The velocity and mindshare is with VS Code. VS with its visual designers had its place .. but desktop is dead and Xamarin competes with frame…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are people on record that it was the Azure division head Scott Guthrie who gave permission to open source ASP.NET Core (which at the time was part of Azure). Later the asp.net team merged with the .net team and brought the open sourcing with them. VS has no place anymore. The velocity and mindshare is with VS Code. VS with its visual designers had its place .. but desktop is dead and Xamarin competes with frame…
As a very longtime iOS and Linux dev turned Windows and .NET dev (with some rust on the side) - who has used VSCode, VS, and Xamarin for multiple years - no. There is a place for a featureful IDE with robustly implemented build, debug, and package management capabilities working out of the box with multiple languages and entrenched technologies. I do very much like VSC and use it all the time for anything involving t…
But, what I didn't know until this recent debacle, is how there is a theory that the reason the .Net-tooling in VSCode is so bad is the same reason we had this watch-debacle. There was some discussion on that in the other HN-thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28968231
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are people on record that it was the Azure division head Scott Guthrie who gave permission to open source ASP.NET Core (which at the time was part of Azure). Later the asp.net team merged with the .net team and brought the open sourcing with them. VS has no place anymore. The velocity and mindshare is with VS Code. VS with its visual designers had its place .. but desktop is dead and Xamarin competes with frame…
As a long-time .NET Developer, there's no way in hell you're replacing my Visual Studio with Visual Studio Code. I'll sooner switch to Rider (which I have a license for and like to use on a Mac.) VSCode is a text editor on steroids. Visual Studio is an IDE. Full stop.
VS is on a whole other level than VSCode when it comes to C#. I suspect that many people here haven't really used the IDE features and VS' debugger for more than simple breaking and inspecting a variable.
Yes, if you have a hobby project, you can use VSCode instead of VS Community Edition just fine. But if you are dealing with concurrency errors, performance analysis, dump analysis, and very, very large projects, you can't use VsCode. VS' GUI is also a lot more flexible than VSCode's. In VS I can have a lot more information present where in VSCode I need to constantly switch windows.
This is reductive, but I am going to repeat the idea that you should not be trusting Microsoft in the first place. Their GitHub acquisition, VSCode, and CodeSpaces are clearly a moat-building towards making GitHub yet another version of Office 365 where you have to pay $$$ for developer tools. GitHub's workflow already bears little resemblance to a "real" Git workflow, and in 7-10 more years I predict that they will…
> GitHub's workflow already bears little resemblance to a "real" Git workflow, Which is? Email lists? GitHub is much easier to deal with than scouring through email threads. It may work for Linux, GNU, and more, but it doesn’t for the majority of devs.
You know what else Git cooperates with better? Push, pull, rebase, squash, a whole world of branching strategies etc. GitHub's PR model is artificially gimped against many useful features of git, to the point where I suspect they actively hate users creating commits and want themselves to be the only ones who can make them. Their PR model actively fights any kind of commit-based review; to the point of erasing access to old, rewritten commits.
Even their diff model is proprietary — and inadequate. You can only diff individual files against previous pushes, and that too only if you manually marked each file as 'viewed'. Diff two tips (read: heads)? Forget about it. You can't have it. Do it out dumbed-down PR way, with a pileup of correction commits you can't squash properly, and be happy you were given the privilege.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2021#section-most-...
Wow, (n)vim is just behind at 30% - I didn’t realize it was that high!
This is reductive, but I am going to repeat the idea that you should not be trusting Microsoft in the first place. Their GitHub acquisition, VSCode, and CodeSpaces are clearly a moat-building towards making GitHub yet another version of Office 365 where you have to pay $$$ for developer tools. GitHub's workflow already bears little resemblance to a "real" Git workflow, and in 7-10 more years I predict that they will…
The “real” got workflow is the one that works. GitHub really helps me focus on real work and not software bookkeeping. But I agree with the thesis of your comment.
GitHub is a real hindrance for reviewing code, and the dumb practices its infantilised review system forces you into make it a nightmare to re-review code after check in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Encouraging? Microsoft demonstrated here that the move wasn't because of quality or that the change was unable to be in the OSS version, they demonstrated that they only act a certain way because of the backlash. If they would have stand their ground, they would have given the image that this change didn't live up to their wanted quality, instead this demonstrated that they are just giving up to peer-pressure because…
I may have done a bad job articulating what I meant. My main point was that I feel (based on like 2nd and 3rd knowledge so could be totally wrong) that this had as much to do with public pressure as it did with a number of well known (and certainly many not well known) dotnet and Microsoft team members who fought for an OSS feature that they had been developing and promoting for most of this year.
That wasn't enough. I'm sure they fought for it before the public did. It took the public calling out Microsoft's duplicity for them to change face. I'm sure the insiders' voices helped, but they weren't adequate.
IOW, Microsoft will absolutely do it again, if they think they can slip it past the public. Outrage can't be a driving force for very long, and they know that.