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

Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

isdotnetopen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 500 posts

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#151

Post by tester756 »

dustinmoris wrote: post #114

As I have said it on the original GitHub issue, there are multiple reasons for why the lives of .NET developers will always suck. First of all every division at Microsoft needs to be cash positive. At DevDiv (developer devision) the main bread maker is Visual Studio. .NET is free and makes no money. VS Code is free and makes no money. OmniSharp is/was free and made no money. ASP.NET is free and makes no money. It's m…

>It's mainly .NET devs who get cleverly pushed to Azure and siloed away from anything non-Microsoft by Microsoft

I guess I'm different kind of .NET Dev because I cannot say how I'm pushed to Azure

You're talking about one of the deployment options avaliable from Visual Studio?

https://i.imgur.com/fbpJTLK.png

>siloed away from anything non-Microsoft by Microsoft

Yea, that's why is incredibly easy to use almost any database with Microsoft's EntityFramework

I will tell you that .NET Core working fine on Linux is what actually brought me to Linux world (renting servers for years)

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#152

Post by BoardsOfCanada »

makeitdouble wrote: post #132
someotherperson wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opinions like this have always been weird to me. Not wrong, but weird. Any contribution that M$ (remember when people would sub the S for a dollar sign?) makes to open source or open standards is to support their own bottom line and we shouldn't expect anything else. The directors have a legal responsibility to the company and to boost the share price, not for the betterment of humanity. To this effect, companies wil…

> Public companies are inherently evil by default The extremism of this positon makes it hard to swallow the message. You might as well be right, but accepting it at face value would be a huge cognitive dissonance for many people working in public companies. Basically, the “are we the baddies ?” answer would be “yes” for a huge chunk of us, and I don’t think that’s how we see it personally. Companies have to make mon…

Obviously it's so simplistic it's dangerous. Try to reason the same way about humans, "the only responsibility is to pass on our genes and therefore there can be no altruism". Right? Wrong.

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#153

Post by rglullis »

makeitdouble wrote: post #132
someotherperson wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opinions like this have always been weird to me. Not wrong, but weird. Any contribution that M$ (remember when people would sub the S for a dollar sign?) makes to open source or open standards is to support their own bottom line and we shouldn't expect anything else. The directors have a legal responsibility to the company and to boost the share price, not for the betterment of humanity. To this effect, companies wil…

> Public companies are inherently evil by default The extremism of this positon makes it hard to swallow the message. You might as well be right, but accepting it at face value would be a huge cognitive dissonance for many people working in public companies. Basically, the “are we the baddies ?” answer would be “yes” for a huge chunk of us, and I don’t think that’s how we see it personally. Companies have to make mon…

I am convinced that 99.999% of the people that claim to be "anti-Capitalist" are in reality anti-Corporativist.

It's way too easy for people working at big companies to think "the company might be evil, but not me / my team". The Corporation gives everyone a moral shield that lets them rationalize all the shit that happens, but the money that pays their salary and the stock options they get all come from the same source.

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#154

Post by ygra »

unhammer wrote: post #67
konsuko wrote: post #33

I can definitely say that for me, this is the straw that breaks the camel's back. I am turning my back on the .NET ecosystem, after having written C# for 7 years. The `dotnet watch` debacle from last year, still having key parts like the debugger closed-source and now again with this: It's just too much. I do not want to build anything of value on top of such a shady platform that's completely controlled by one Megac…

is `dotnet watch` basically `git ls-files|entr dotnet build` ? (entr is http://eradman.com/entrproject/ – like inotifywait but easier)

I think it also replaces the running code on the fly.

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#155

Post by oefrha »

happymellon wrote: post #76
Someone wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple didn't take ownership and then start closing CUPS, but they have also never pretended to be a friend of OpenSouce. They haven't produced anything opensource since then. Two counter-examples: They open sourced Swift in 2015 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swift_(programming_language)#H... ), and Swift-DocC in 2021 ( https://www.swift.org/blog/swift-docc/ ) Apple bought CUPS in 2007 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/w…

I'm not sure how they are counterpoints. Who would use a programming language that wasn't open? Except dot net devs. Which is the point. CUPS was critical infrastructure for Apple, so they bought it. Since it is GPL they couldn't close it, hence they abandoned it. Apple are not your friend, but they never claimed to be, you just might have an overlapping interest, Microsoft hold big "We Heart Linux" events.

> Who would use a programming language that wasn't open?

The vast majority of iOS developers. Swift 1.0 wasn’t open source, and IIRC when it was announced there wasn’t even a promise that it would be open source. I think Chris Lattner did signal they were willing to seriously consider it some time in the future; that was all.

There is a lot of money to be made in iOS, so people will use whatever Apple forces them to use, whether it’s open source or not. If some would leave money on the table on ideological grounds, all the better for everyone else.

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#156

Post by blagie »

kelnos wrote: post #37

This sort of thing has been MS's playbook since I was a kid, or earlier. It surprises me that people are still surprised when things like this happen. I especially think someone with Miguel de Icaza's experience should know better[0]. It's interesting to see the generational difference here. Many of my somewhat-younger (even only by 7-10 years) programmer/techie friends just don't remember the Microsoft of the 80s an…

Companies aren't people. The set of people in Microsoft is completely different in 2022 than it was in 1995. A quarter-century has passed. It's not the same organization as it was back then. It has very little relationship to it.

I've been consistently surprised by Microsoft doing non-evil things over the past decade, until I accepted that I no longer had reason to hate it.

Conversely, for a while, I was surprised by Google doing evil things, until I realized that the Google of 15 years ago no longer existed. The company has over 10x the employees of the old Google of "don't be evil" days. Even if no one had left, it's over 90% of people who don't know how to not be evil, and don't know they're not supposed to be evil. In practice, most non-evil people I knew at the old Google have long since left (although far from everyone, but enough that it's probably Microsoft was evil in the nineties. In 2022, it's not a saint, but it's pretty good.

Google was genuinely good in the early '00s. Today, it's pretty evil.

The same has happened to many of my non-profits. Open source was started to strip ethics out of free software, and many genuinely nasty organizations from back then now behave like the FSF of the nineties. Conversely, some of my favorite non-profits went woke, and stopped doing what they were created to do. A few of my favorite academic institutions turned into Enron, while others moved up. Etc.

Organizations are abstractions. Swap out the people and incentives, and it's a new thing under an old name.

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#157

Post by danielovichdk »

someotherperson wrote: post #71
kelnos wrote: post #37

This sort of thing has been MS's playbook since I was a kid, or earlier. It surprises me that people are still surprised when things like this happen. I especially think someone with Miguel de Icaza's experience should know better[0]. It's interesting to see the generational difference here. Many of my somewhat-younger (even only by 7-10 years) programmer/techie friends just don't remember the Microsoft of the 80s an…

Opinions like this have always been weird to me. Not wrong, but weird. Any contribution that M$ (remember when people would sub the S for a dollar sign?) makes to open source or open standards is to support their own bottom line and we shouldn't expect anything else. The directors have a legal responsibility to the company and to boost the share price, not for the betterment of humanity. To this effect, companies wil…

Any big company has different cultures based on what people are doing within that company.

The sales-force are bonus-pay-based on how much cloud they sell.

Some of the development groups are paid for delivering sustainable software that is also open-source.

It's not black and white. Many politics are being played.

I do believe Scott Guthrie and some of the other VP's are good folks that understands the need for being open and honest. Anders Hejlsberg too for example.

But is's not black or white.

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#158

Post by andi999 »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #141
bayindirh wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll just say that while Linux desktop is not perfect, I see much more people who're "assembling" their own environments to work at speeds I can't ever imagine. I'm part of a community who does amazing things with all these fragmented parts and assemble unimaginable things while staying productive and inventing new ways of work. The overall maturity of these small parts have not reversed the tide, but actually change…

> people who're "assembling" their own environments to work at speeds I can't ever imagine. People who assemble cars from scratch can accomplish things from that are amazing too, but only 0 1% of the population will ever want to do that.

It is 2022 and my suse linux smb share still doesnt work (after spending a few hours on it)

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#159

Post by cm2187 »

makeitdouble wrote: post #132
someotherperson wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opinions like this have always been weird to me. Not wrong, but weird. Any contribution that M$ (remember when people would sub the S for a dollar sign?) makes to open source or open standards is to support their own bottom line and we shouldn't expect anything else. The directors have a legal responsibility to the company and to boost the share price, not for the betterment of humanity. To this effect, companies wil…

> Public companies are inherently evil by default The extremism of this positon makes it hard to swallow the message. You might as well be right, but accepting it at face value would be a huge cognitive dissonance for many people working in public companies. Basically, the “are we the baddies ?” answer would be “yes” for a huge chunk of us, and I don’t think that’s how we see it personally. Companies have to make mon…

Particularly the logic “your code is not open source” = “you are evil”…

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#160

Post by simonh »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #138
makeitdouble wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Public companies are inherently evil by default The extremism of this positon makes it hard to swallow the message. You might as well be right, but accepting it at face value would be a huge cognitive dissonance for many people working in public companies. Basically, the “are we the baddies ?” answer would be “yes” for a huge chunk of us, and I don’t think that’s how we see it personally. Companies have to make mon…

> IKEA has had an outsized positive impact IKEA has been illegally logging forests in romania for decades. The first public conpany was involved in slavery. Show me a large enough company and there will be a history of fraud, illegality and human rights abuses.

They've bee caught using wood from companies logging illegally yes, but that's just as much an enforcement issue in these countries as it is on IKEA to manage it's supply chain.

Also using tainted wood isn't the only thing IKEA has ever done, just as breaking the speed limit or parking illegally isn't he only thing I've ever done. If you were held to a "one strike and you're out" good/evil standard would you really stand up? I know I wouldn't.

Post reply on HN