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

411–420 of 500 posts

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

#411

Post by ur-whale »

This tired old trick is the same one Apple pulled off 20 years ago when they first released OSX, and which grocery retailers have been pulling off since the day supermarkets were invented: dangle a nice, quasi-free product to get the customer into the shop where he becomes a captive audience and you can ram the rest of your inventory down their throat.

Oooh, look, we're OpenSource now, OSX is Unix and the source code is available to all.

This was a blatant lie by omission (omitting the giant pile of proprietary crap heaped on top of the FOSS layers) but it worked like a charm: tons of OSS devs drank the kool-aid switched to using Macs.

Lo and behold, 20 years down the road, the Apple ecosystem is the most closed flytrap ever devised by an IT company.

MSFT is pulling the exact same trick here: .NET is an integral part of the MSFT ecosystem, most of which is completely closed.

Don't be fooled.

Don't drink the kool-aid.

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

#413

Post by pid-1 »

spaetzleesser wrote: post #276
Jemm wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It doesn't have to be like that. The focus on shareholders started sometime in the 80s.

AFAIK the history of modern corporations starts with the Dutch East India Company. I have a hard time believing things get better as we go back in time.

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

#414

Post by cutler »

For those of you too young to remember check-out Microsoft's history of embrace and extend, their Linux/SCO patent racket and their refusal to implement web standards when Internet Explorer had dominant market share. If you had lived through this you would NEVER trust Microsoft no matter how loudly they trumpet their absurd claim to be supporters of Linux and open source. They only reason Microsoft support Linux and open source is because they failed to destroy them. .Net is just another of their desperate attempts to lock everyone into the Microsoft Way before revealing the hidden lock-in.

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

#415

Post by nickstinemates »

mattgreenrocks wrote: post #318
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…

"How monotonously alike all the great tyrants and conquerors have been; how gloriously different are the saints." - C.S. Lewis I still recall people fawning over how Google was going to be "different" in 2006, and how it was going to save us from Microsoft. Nowadays, they are essentially what MS was in its' heyday. Blind faith in corporations is not the way forward. I've always understood the hacker ethos to have str…

Amen.

The further corporatisation of OSS through lobbying organizations like the CNCF is a sad state of affairs. But it is also the place where VCs are putting a lot of their money. That and until 2 weeks ago, Web3

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

#416

Post by hvs »

ethbr0 wrote: post #239
oblio wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That was by necessity more than choice. The internet wasn't really a viable option at the time.

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

#417

Post by spaetzleesser »

pid-1 wrote: post #413
spaetzleesser wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't have to be like that. The focus on shareholders started sometime in the 80s.

AFAIK the history of modern corporations starts with the Dutch East India Company. I have a hard time believing things get better as we go back in time.

When I grew up it was an embarrassment for a company to lay off people. Nowadays executives get big bonuses for laying off people.

Things have changed since sometime in the 1980s.

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

#418

Post by unclad5968 »

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…

I'm pretty confused how anyone can be around for the "dotnet watch" debacle and come out the other side thinking "this is the most open project I've ever participated in"

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

#420

Post by makeitdouble »

actionfromafar wrote: post #376
com2kid wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ikea also sells nice, solid wood, furniture. And they typically do so at a price that is much more affordable than their competitors. If you want to go into Ikea and just buy long lasting solid wood products, go ahead! Indeed I'd argue Ikea has made new solid wood furniture more accessible, heck sometimes new Ikea wood furniture is cheaper than consignment store wood furniture!

I see. Then it's OK to skirt environmental and worker protection laws, I guess. As long as the products are nice.

Environment is tough. I see IKEA to blame here, but as long as there will be customer for cheaper goods who don’t care much about where the wood comes from, or how all of that is fabricated, it won’t change much. Other smaller makers have the same conundrum when they source their wood from bigger entities who will either hide where it actually comes from, and/or give plausible deniability. That’s where I see having everyone hypothetically switch to smaller furniture makers wouldn’t be enough, we’d need a lot more to make actual progress.

A bit the same way so many corporations are “carbon neutral” through offset, even if it’s a scam under most of these.

IKEA using it’s position to do something could be a realistic solution, I just don’t know if there is much hope in that regard.

The coffee scene could be a exemple where traceability helps a lot to improve the market (as a consumer there are options to do the right thing for non crazy prices), while the global picture stays grim as the most sold coffee will always be the unmarked super market value pack.

Worker protection: same as for Amazon, I wish they rapidly advance their robotization programs. In the meantime I strongly support more regulation, and would like security and social policies baked into the prices, especially as I don’t think there would be that much actual impact. Just as wish more companies across the board get unions.

Post reply on HN