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

151–160 of 214 posts

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#151

Post by naikrovek »

cryptonector wrote: post #131
naikrovek wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no one cares what you do. telemetry is only viewed in aggregate. it doesn't make sense, nor is it a good use of time, to scrutinize the telemetry of a single user for any reason. you keep on living in your town where the people don't have fingerprints or names, and the shoes leave no tracks. I'll be over here getting things done, because doing good work is far more important than avoiding being seen.

I gave you more than just privacy arguments. Can you address those too?

it's not more work when trying to stop exfiltration or espionage because telemetry doesn't get sent to random places. Microsoft publish the hostnames that receive telemetry. block them and you block telemetry from being sent. it still gets collected locally though.

the performance argument is solid and I will see if I can measure that before I agree with you.

from what I've read, at least among the common telemetry systems I know of (Azure Application Insights, OpenTelemetry, and Microsoft's system built into the OS), telemetry is gathered for a bit then sent in a batch, which would indicate that performance is at least a consideration.

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#152

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

Maursault wrote: post #54
tambourine_man wrote: post #26

Apple should follow MS's example and open source its Terminal.app It's a decent terminal emulator, but could use several enhancements and the community could help. For some reason I haven't changed to iTerm yet, even though it's been objectively better in every way for years. Even the minor gripe I had with font rendering is fixed. There's something about using default apps as much as possible that appeals to me. But…

> Apple should follow MS's example and open source its Terminal.app This is bellyaching about nothing. Instead, Microsoft should follow Apple's example and open source the operating system . The only part of macOS that is not open source is the GUI, i.e. Quartz Compositor, and the gui applications. Microsoft, meanwhile, is an incredible slouch when it comes to open source, only very recently changing their hostile "e…

>Microsoft should follow Apple's example and open source the operating system

1. Apple did not open-source MacOS. Hell, I can't even buy a copy of it and run it on a PC but instead I have to buy Apple HW to get it, while at least I can download a copy of Windows and run it (even unregistered) on any cheap PC HW and develop SW for it, without paying for Microsoft hardware, or even for the OS itself (gray legal area), unlike Apple where the only way I can run MacOS and develop SW for it is by buying Apple hardware which is a far more restrictive way, from a monetary perspective, to get someone on board

2. Microsoft cannot open-source Windows as it contains a lot of third party code for which it has no licensing rights to open source. They've explained this multiple times. I assume the same applies to modern MacOS.

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#153

Post by forgotpwd16 »

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/

Is there a comparison of Darwin to other BSDs?

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#154

Post by forgotpwd16 »

dundarious wrote: post #121
naikrovek wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Terminal team is very aware of this code, and are not able to use it due to how Casey licensed it. They aren't even allowed to look at it. Casey deliberately licensed it as GPL so that Microsoft could not use it, actually. That's his choice, of course. The Terminal team have a path forward to implement strong performance improvements based on techniques like those Casey described, and are working on those improve…

I think Casey's somewhat caustic exasperation can be a major distraction at times, especially if you are exposed to it the first time you listen to him. But I have to say, his frustration is justified. He has valid complaints about almost the entire industry and educational system, so it's not just directed at Microsoft, and certainly not just at the individual grunts working there (almost all of use are grunts). I d…

>to create an essentially perfect terminal/console

Because they thought terminals are outdated and no one cares about them or/and it isn't a flashy enough addition for marketing.

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#155

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

pjmlp wrote: post #144
mattl wrote: post #72

When did people stop calling them terminal emulators?

There are only terminal emulators on UNIX clones. When Windows Terminal is running cmd or Powershell underneath, there is zero emulation going on.

They emulate ANSI control sequences originally intended for dumb terminals and the teletype bell.

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#156

Post by test1235 »

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)

Installer here at bottom:

https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/releases/tag/v1.12.109...

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#157

Post by majkinetor »

jiggawatts wrote: post #122
what-the-grump wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just FUD? You are running an operating system made by Microsoft, they could monitor how often you click your mouse just like every website on the planet at this point but dont. Boolean telemetry on feature use is somehow the end of the world? Get out.

Look at it this way: PowerShell sends telemetry. The Terminal in which it runs sends Telemetry. The "dotnet core" framework PowerShell uses in turn also sends telemetry. The PowerShell modules you load (from Microsoft!) send telemetry. In effect, ONE application has at least four independent sets of telemetry. This is the console , the kind that you would use on servers . High-security servers in DMZs. Servers hostin…

Telemetry is essential thing to understand how service is used. It leads to better service for all users.

In the case you mention, it should be IMO up to you to prevent this, probably via firewall.

Having standard telemetry environment variable might be for the best. There is a risk in this case to disable telemetry systematically though, even if you want to just block it in one app, which is also not something I as vendor of many tools would want.

This is probably not easy to fix for everybody to be happy. And its probably not that important for security - there are FAR easier way to deduce something about someone then to 1) hack microsoft telemetry servers or transit 2) look into the patterns of use of specific programs. Besides, telemetry data is anonymous. So I guess even in the case you get the data, what could you do with it ? I can send you billion of telemetry data of government services I make, you can only deduce that people start working at 7AM and get lots of passwords wrong before first coffee.

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#158

Post by forgotpwd16 »

markus_zhang wrote: post #118
naikrovek wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Terminal team is very aware of this code, and are not able to use it due to how Casey licensed it. They aren't even allowed to look at it. Casey deliberately licensed it as GPL so that Microsoft could not use it, actually. That's his choice, of course. The Terminal team have a path forward to implement strong performance improvements based on techniques like those Casey described, and are working on those improve…

Just to clarify, I do not hate MSFT. I just don't have the ability to implement such things and just curious whether it is feasible (in reasonable time) or not. If the actual code is not available maybe someone can fork the Terminal code? Or if that does not get around the legal stuffs, maybe take the idea and go from there?

You cannot use Casey's code (GPL) in Terminal (MIT). But he has explained his model. Issue is iirc what he proposed and how Terminal works significantly differ.

Re: Windows Terminal Source Code

#160

Post by turing_complete »

dundarious wrote: post #56

Worth watching Casey Muratori's series of videos on terminals, and how to implement them, where he often makes specific comparison to Windows Terminal. He has some specific criticisms that are easy to disagree with, but the vast majority are well warranted. His broader series of videos on the topic are even worthwhile from a purely "software engineering education" standpoint. https://youtu.be/hxM8QmyZXtg I feel a bit…

You say it's easy to disagree with him, but I've yet to see a well-thought-out argument where he is wrong in this video series.

I hope Microsoft will award him an honorary PhD though.

Post reply on HN