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

231–240 of 500 posts

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

#231

Post by bayindirh »

Ygg2 wrote: post #221
bayindirh wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I see that KDE has bug A and Gnome has bug B. Or KDE has feature C that Gnome doesn't have, and vice versa. All in all as user. No DE fits me because bugs and features are scattered around. This is a "grass is greener over the fence" perspective. You can install apps for missing functionality or report bugs for the things you don't like. Except, Windows and macOS doesn't care about your bug reports, and some of the…

> This is a "grass is greener over the fence" perspective. Not really. Just because neighbors grass is greener, doesn't mean Linux grass isn't a black wilting mess. > So, after some time it's borderline nitpicking IMHO. Example of "nitpicking" I/colleagues ran into: Multi monitor support, HDR, DE bricking after update. And due to Linux fractious nature even if one distro fixed it, another would still have that issue.…

> Not really. Just because neighbors grass is greener, doesn't mean Linux grass isn't a black wilting mess.

Linux's grass was a much darker green in the past, but wasn't black, neither back then, nor now.

> Multi monitor support

Just plugged a secondary monitor into one of my colleagues Linux box a week ago, a second desktop appeared three seconds later. Used two monitors for 6 years, until 6 years ago. It was working fine, then.

> HDR

Don't have an HDR panel, can't say a word about it, but VLC handles HDR-SDR conversion just fine.

> DE bricking after update.

My current MacBook Pro bricked after an OS update, because of a bug in an OpenVPN client's OS integration. No, the tool is paid, and no, macOS has no OpenVPN client embedded in it. Maybe I shouldn't have installed a paid, premium OpenVPN client, who knows. Anyway, I wiped and reinstalled the thing as a result.

The symptom? A frozen progress bar under the Apple logo. No time remaining, no error, nothing. Can I have the logs please? "Haha, of course not, you peasant."

And I only wiped and re-installed a Linux distro once, 15 years ago, because I did something the tool warned me to not to do.

And Windows somehow succeeds to corrupt my older computer's BIOS after installing updates and reboots. Sometimes it hangs all fans blazing during the restart. No, it's not the battery. That also never happened with Linux.

So, I arguably have a much better experience with Linux w.r.t. macOS and Windows in the last 15 years.

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

#232

Post by tsujp »

This is depressing.

Last years `dotnet watch` and now this. I kind of went with the tide into the position I'm in (basically a C# developer for that side of my job) and as much as I was impressed with, "oh .NET is open source and cross platform now well done" and "oh, F# is a really nice language that can take advantage of the .NET ecosystem well done" it's things like THIS that make me want to run. I kind of want to. Why participate in an ecosystem where the biggest corporate overlord is trying to reduce your ability to _do things_. I'd rather use Ruby or Crystal for OOP (and I want to, they are both amazing) and OCaml for functional programming (of which F# is basically a ".NET OCaml" clone).

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

#233

Post by Georgelemental »

foepys wrote: post #35
DeathArrow wrote: post #14

.NET is open. You can find its source on Github. The .NET platform being open doesn't mean everything targeting the .NET platform is open, too.

A problem of the .NET ecosystem is that there is no open source debugger for C#. The Microsoft-provided debugger has strict license terms that only allow it to be used in Visual Studio and Visual Studio Code. JetBrains needed to write their own debugger for their cross-platform IDE Rider. Luckily they already knew a lot about .NET to do this and it turned out very well but it's still not the official debugger and als…

https://github.com/Samsung/netcoredbg

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

#234

Post by Karunamon »

goodpoint wrote: post #210
oblio wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> trying to isolate Desktop Linux as an irrelevant layer They're obviously doing that, but they don't really need to. Desktop Linux is its own enemy. 2 major GUI toolkits, frequent upgrades to them, generally with breaking changes, multiple DEs, frequent upgrades to them, also with breaking changes, a full decades of bickering over a solution that solves actual end user and operator problems in a standardizing way (s…

> 2 major GUI toolkits, ... multiple DEs, frequent upgrades to them, also with breaking changes, a full decades of bickering I was using Linux desktops 20 years ago and the same arguments were made. They were FUD and they still are. 1) having "too much" choice is nothing to complain about. 2) if you are a beginner, pick a stable distribution and your desktop will be completely immune to churn. Use it as a productivit…

The idea of a desktop needing "maintenance" is something the industry has been moving away from.

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

#235

Post by foxhill »

alistairSH wrote: post #229
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…

I’d say companies are inherently amoral. Not evil. Subtle, but important nuance. It’s only when evil and greedy people are in charge that companies become evil. Sadly an all too common state of affairs, but not a law of the universe.

i agree - it’s a significant distinction that often gets overlooked. whilst a company is ran by (ostensibly) moral agents, the overall entity is not the sum of those parts.

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

#236

Post by Jemm »

alistairSH wrote: post #229
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…

I’d say companies are inherently amoral. Not evil. Subtle, but important nuance. It’s only when evil and greedy people are in charge that companies become evil. Sadly an all too common state of affairs, but not a law of the universe.

Corporations are sociopaths by their very design. Their number one mandate is to make money for their shareholders and to grow. This colours every decision they make.

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

#237

Post by pwdisswordfish0 »

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 contribution that M$ makes to open source or open standards is to support their own bottom line

Does Microsoft contribute financially to any social programs or other philanthropic projects? Are all those contributions done solely to support their bottom line?

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

#238

Post by lou1306 »

goodpoint wrote: post #210
oblio wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> trying to isolate Desktop Linux as an irrelevant layer They're obviously doing that, but they don't really need to. Desktop Linux is its own enemy. 2 major GUI toolkits, frequent upgrades to them, generally with breaking changes, multiple DEs, frequent upgrades to them, also with breaking changes, a full decades of bickering over a solution that solves actual end user and operator problems in a standardizing way (s…

> 2 major GUI toolkits, ... multiple DEs, frequent upgrades to them, also with breaking changes, a full decades of bickering I was using Linux desktops 20 years ago and the same arguments were made. They were FUD and they still are. 1) having "too much" choice is nothing to complain about. 2) if you are a beginner, pick a stable distribution and your desktop will be completely immune to churn. Use it as a productivit…

Nothing like telling your boss "Sorry I missed the deadline, but my desktop needed maintenance"

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

#239

Post by ethbr0 »

oblio wrote: post #100
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…

People forget that before about 2000 or so, Microsoft was bigger than the next 10 or so software companies, >. And had much higher profit margins that the other tech companies. IBM created the playbook, Microsoft perfected it, FAANG copied it.

One distinction between Microsoft and early FAANG (except for Apple): FAANG cut out the distributor and kept those profits themselves. Microsoft always had distributors as a key component of their platform sales.

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

#240

Post by goodpoint »

bayindirh wrote: post #213
goodpoint wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> MIT/permissive licenses are for developer freedom, but xGPL and other strong copyleft licenses are for users' freedom. GPLv3 also provides plenty of protection for developers unlike other licenses, especially around patents. Also, all developers are users of development tools and libraries.

Yes. All developers are users of the said tools, applications and libraries, but the reverse is not true. i.e. not all users are developers. So, while I see this is a clarification, I don't think what I've said is blatantly wrong.

> I don't think what I've said is blatantly wrong.

Nobody accused you to do so. I wrote "also" in both sentences to add nuance to what you wrote and finesse it.

Post reply on HN