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

Windows Terminal Source Code

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 214 posts

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#141

Post by digisign »

judge2020 wrote: post #84
disruptiveink wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is what it once meant. "Spyware" was the term used for any process that called home regarding any information about you, your computer or your usage in the background. Calling home for anything other than "Check for updates" menu items or other actions where calling home was the explicit action the user wanted would get your name tarnished in the media and added to the signature list of software built for the so…

I don’t see why the makers of an app aren’t entitled to seeing how the app is used for the people who opt to use it. If I’m using windows terminal, I want them to know how often I use the hot keys, how often I split a terminal vertically then horizontally (alt-shift-d), etc. lest it be removed, since I know they don’t have infinite resources to dedicate to this single project to maintain every feature forever and eve…

Entitled to potentially sensitive information without asking?

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#142

Post by naikrovek »

twaw wrote: post #132
justin66 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They aren't even allowed to look at it. Casey deliberately licensed it as GPL so that Microsoft could not use it, actually. Why does Microsoft prevent its developers from reading GPL-licensed code?

M$ is long time GPL hater. They use lot of GPL code, but stil hate it, because they cannot make profit from it. Commercial companies like BSD-style licenses, because they are free as in "free work".

they don't use any GPL code in stuff that they license in any other way. it isn't a matter of liking the license or not, it's a matter of license compatibility.

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#143

Post by ahtihn »

Maursault wrote: post #62
melony wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mac without the userland is mostly useless. At that point you might as well switch fully to FreeBSD.

This is a straw man, and also not entirely accurate. Darwin is BSD, and in theory just as useful as BSD, or FreeBSD, NetBSD, and useful to developers, and to anyone that can figure out how to install it and use it. [1] Meanwhile, Windows without hardware less than 2 years old is absolutely worthless. Thus, Linux. [1] http://www.puredarwin.org/

> Meanwhile, Windows without hardware less than 2 years old is absolutely worthless.

That is not my experience at all.

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#145

Post by digisign »

Lammy wrote: post #6

Here are all the ways it spies on you: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/search?q=Telemetry%3A%... https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/blob/main/src/host/tel...

So many folks in this subthread don't seem to realize that computer security is a thing to be desired and a fundamental right. Or, it was on Windows and Mac until the last decade or so.

There are real costs to not being able to trust your own local computer and personal information. History is rife with examples, from IBM and internment during WWII to the malware and NSA of modern times. Data is no longer deleted.

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#146

Post by jborean93 »

briHass wrote: post #113

Though I've been enjoying WT, there are some limitations that have bit me: 1) As a 'Store' app, it can be a pain to install in locked-down corpo networks that block Windows Store. Winget can be a workaround, or you can extract the exe from packages, but an installer would be nice. 2) Since it's a UWP app, there's no way to launch it as another user-identity (i.e. runas)

> Since it's a UWP app, there's no way to launch it as another user-identity (i.e. runas)

This is possible, the only issue is that the app needs to also be installed on the other user’s profile. Once installed for the user you can use runas.exe to start wt.exe as another user. I believe the UX from the right menu needs improvement but it is possible.

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#147

Post by mrtweetyhack »

Maursault wrote: post #111
tambourine_man wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s orders of magnitude more closed source than open on macOS. But yeah, all software should be open source.

I probably shouldn't dignify this with a response, but yeah, you don't know what you're talking about. The kernel XNU is OSS. The BSD userland is OSS. This means that technically, the operating system is open source. If you go by file count, there is far more OSS in macOS than not. But if you want to go by file sizes, then the only closed source parts of macOS, again, are the GUI, the Quartz Compositor, and a lot of…

No post body was provided.

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#148

Post by digisign »

Terry_Roll wrote: post #83
Lammy wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some pretty detailed comments on many of them if you click through to their call sites, and more can be inferred from the file names of the callers. Let's take a look at `windowio.cpp` for example. This most-generic event fires every time you type any input character on the keyboard: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/blob/57c3953aca49f68ac... It also has more-specific events for several different ways o…

Isnt that why Windows is called Windows because its a window on their user's life?

Nice, living in glass-house with no curtains! Who do you want to be seen by today?

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#149

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

Maursault wrote: post #62
melony wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mac without the userland is mostly useless. At that point you might as well switch fully to FreeBSD.

This is a straw man, and also not entirely accurate. Darwin is BSD, and in theory just as useful as BSD, or FreeBSD, NetBSD, and useful to developers, and to anyone that can figure out how to install it and use it. [1] Meanwhile, Windows without hardware less than 2 years old is absolutely worthless. Thus, Linux. [1] http://www.puredarwin.org/

>Meanwhile, Windows without hardware less than 2 years old is absolutely worthless.

This is false. Source: Installed Windows 11 from official Microsoft ISO on a laptop from 2016 (6 years old) and runs buttery smooth.

Please stop spreading FUD like this.

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#150

Post by babylonunited »

Maursault wrote: post #111
tambourine_man wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s orders of magnitude more closed source than open on macOS. But yeah, all software should be open source.

I probably shouldn't dignify this with a response, but yeah, you don't know what you're talking about. The kernel XNU is OSS. The BSD userland is OSS. This means that technically, the operating system is open source. If you go by file count, there is far more OSS in macOS than not. But if you want to go by file sizes, then the only closed source parts of macOS, again, are the GUI, the Quartz Compositor, and a lot of…

I think a lot of value comes with the Frameworks, with them you get at least source compatibility with macOS and without them the core operating system will just be another Unix operating system without much hardware supports.

So I personally put much more weight on the Frameworks over XNU and BSD userland. There is a reason GNUStep is less dead than PureDarwin :D

Post reply on HN