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

361–370 of 500 posts

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

#361

Post by rglullis »

_-david-_ wrote: post #353
rglullis wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, so? Isn't that the exact purpose of institutions?

If normal people (shareholders, c levels, etc) are going to engage in bad behavior then why do you think other normal people (lawmakers) are not? If lawmakers are going to be rewarded from bad behavior then we can't fix the rules / laws. I'm not suggesting we shouldn't try, but it isn't really silver bullet.

This is why I said about institutions. Lawmakers are (or should be) subject to public scrutiny.

An employee from a corporation benefits from a corporation that abuses their power. Ordinary citizens that vote for a corrupt politician do not, and have no invested interest in them.

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

#362

Post by oaiey »

andresalarcong wrote: post #336

C++ could be an option? technical design and roadmap managed by foundation, and there are good tool ecosystems for this language, what do you think? You know if I choose Golang, Java, Kotlin, DotNet will be probably that this history repeating.

C++ is doing that a bit too much.

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

#363

Post by UmbertoNoEco »

visose wrote: post #185
gigel82 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.NET was open sourced in 2016, that's 6 years ago. It looks like you were 1+ years fully within the ecosystem before any part of it was OSS, and now you're demanding new features they write get open sourced as well? Reminds of that time they introduced WiFi on planes; it was a brand new thing, and they let folks on the flight use it for free - but of course being a new tech it broke down after about an hour. There wa…

I agree with this sentiment, but you forgot to credit Louis CK for the anecdote you borrowed.

He should steal material from less well-known comedians. That's what the pros do.

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

#364

Post by gigel82 »

visose wrote: post #185
gigel82 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.NET was open sourced in 2016, that's 6 years ago. It looks like you were 1+ years fully within the ecosystem before any part of it was OSS, and now you're demanding new features they write get open sourced as well? Reminds of that time they introduced WiFi on planes; it was a brand new thing, and they let folks on the flight use it for free - but of course being a new tech it broke down after about an hour. There wa…

I agree with this sentiment, but you forgot to credit Louis CK for the anecdote you borrowed.

Ah, a connoisseur! :)

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

#365

Post by gigel82 »

croes wrote: post #167
gigel82 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.NET was open sourced in 2016, that's 6 years ago. It looks like you were 1+ years fully within the ecosystem before any part of it was OSS, and now you're demanding new features they write get open sourced as well? Reminds of that time they introduced WiFi on planes; it was a brand new thing, and they let folks on the flight use it for free - but of course being a new tech it broke down after about an hour. There wa…

They replace an existing open source feature with a closed source one. So that's totally different.

No they don't, they give you a choice between the existing open source solution and a new closed source one.

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

#366

Post by toyg »

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #309
rtpg wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The LSP situation with Python was very frustrating, because it totally breathes the oxygen out of "proper" OSS implementations. I feel like with a _loooot_ of coordination it should be possible to have proper, open source LSP implementations that are very performant. Mainly a question of finding enough people willing to fund this work, because it's definitely work! I personally also have gripes about ending up with s…

Indeed. And even very intelligent, competent AND benevolent MS employees downplay this: https://twitter.com/bitecode_dev/status/1537357261554733056 Steve cannot see how it will lead to attrition or vendor lock in. It's not that there are no good people at MS, but the internal marketting is strong as well.

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair

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

#367

Post by yonaguska »

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…

> Bill Gates has also done an amazing job rehabilitating his image through philanthropy.

I think this is no longer true following the pandemic and his vaccine work. And his Epstein connections. In retrospect to this, it's hard for me personally to take his philanthropy into account. I went from childhood, disliking Bill Gates for his anticompetitive Microsoft stuff, to college age, admiring him for his philanthropy, and now back to harboring a strong distrust of the man.

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

#368

Post by [deleted] »

alxlaz wrote: post #327
oaiey wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but we are not talking about a two man company or a historic trust fund in southern France. We talk about an US shareholder company which leadership (do not be nitpicky) can be sued for by shareholders by not doing the best for their money. And law indeed differs... But everywhere someone will be made responsible for not getting the best for their buck (the simplest case: being fired). That applies to FAANGMxyz…

I was under the impression (based on the USSC's opinion back in 2015, see e.g. https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-co... ) that this was not true even in the US. Has anything changed in the meantime? Or did I get that article wrong from the beginning?

[deleted]

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

#369

Post by csmpltn »

tinco wrote: post #355
bob1029 wrote: post #250

.NET is the most open, non-trivial ecosystem I have ever participated in. I experienced 2 different problems with .NET (back in 2.x/3.x days), and was able to have interaction with the actual MS developers on their Github issue page without any sort of bullshit overhead process. Within days, I saw traction on my comments and within months I saw PRs that ultimately resolved the issue I presented. The following year, I…

You are unaware of how much better it is with the other ecosystems. Probably all of them except the ones controlled by Apple, Oracle and IBM. You want to know what's better than having actual MS developers interact with your issue on GH? Being able to submit a MR yourself and actually have that MR be merged in within days of it being good to go. That's not just a dream, that's the standard way of operating for most l…

> "You want to know what's better than having actual MS developers interact with your issue on GH? Being able to submit a MR yourself and actually have that MR be merged in within days of it being good to go."

.NET isn't your average hobby project - it's used everywhere. It's imperative that changes go through the proper due process here. It takes time to prepare design documents and review them, discuss the changes and different alternatives, review the code, implement the changes and test them properly.

If that's somehow a problem to you, I think your expectations need to be readjusted. This is not the kind of project that should hastily accept code.

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

#370

Post by nerdix »

smcl wrote: post #110
StopHammoTime wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Home licensing has not been a big deal for a very long time. Their actual cash cows are things like Enterprise Licensing which aren’t going anywhere soon. You’ve also entirely excluded server licensing as well. Have a read of their actual results and maybe re-think your hypothesis a bit. Microsoft’s revenue went up by 18%. I think they’ll be fine without some .NET extension,

Exactly. This is yet another bizarre move from MS which doesn't exactly seem to make financial sense and just pisses off developers who might otherwise be persuaded to soften their stance towards them. I wonder if these are part of a deliberate strategy MS are trying, or just the actions a few overly ambitious managers

This seems like one of those decisions that they will walk back within a month similar to the "hot reloading" fiasco. This makes even less sense than that because it was clear which moat they were protecting (Visual Studio proper) by making hot reloading "exclusive" to Visual Studio 2022.

But this extension, by its very nature, is for the VS Code. So, in this case, VS Code isn't being neutered to make a paid product more appealing. The only thing I can think of is that they want to keep the "secret sauce" away from JetBrains to give Visual Studio an advantage over Rider. Its really perplexing when you consider that they created LSP and DAP. And C# was one of the first languages to have an implementation for both standards which opened up the door to potential C# feature parity between Visual Studio and non-Visual Studio editors.

I just don't understand why anyone working on .NET tooling would think that this decision would go over better than the hot reloading one. Once you open the FOSS genie, you cannot put it back in the bottle without stirring controversy. Is protecting some small percentage of VS license revenue worth all of this bad PR they seem to be willing to subject themselves too?

Post reply on HN