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

Microsoft Edit

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 337 posts

Re: Microsoft Edit

#171

Post by shortrounddev2 »

pjmlp wrote: post #135
wasimanitoba wrote: post #117

Meanwhile, they forced AI Copilot bloat into Notepad, whose singular use-case was supposed to be that it does one thing well without unnecessary features.

Unfortunately, the new Edit isn't safe from such decisions. While Satya might have made the change Microsoft Now we have a schizophrenia of Web and Desktop frameworks, and themselves hardly use them, what used to be a comfortable VS wizard, or plugin, now is e.g. a CLI tool that dumps an Excel file, showing that newer blood has hardly any Windows development culture, or their upper management.

There are currently no ideal native app development frameworks on Windows. WinForms is the closest thing

Re: Microsoft Edit

#172

Post by mysterydip »

scoopr wrote: post #166

The original edit.com, from around dos 6.22 (and later 7.0, ie. win95) was my first IDE. Well, I started with qbasic, so I was fairly familiar with it as it was similar (or same?), but when I started learning C/C++ with djgpp, I just continued using edit.com. My "project file" was `e.bat` with `edit file1.cpp file2.cpp file3.cpp`, as it was one of the few editors that I knew that had a decent multi file support with…

It may not have had syntax highlighting, but it did have syntax capitalization (for lack of a better term?). If you typed a line in all lowercase, after hitting enter it would automatically uppercase the reserved words. It wasn't much, but it helped

Re: Microsoft Edit

#173

Post by delfinom »

masfoobar wrote: post #146

About a month ago I heard Microsoft had their own Linux distribution to help Microsoft Windows users feel more at home. From memory, it was a rather simple GNOME setup. Nothing special. I am surprised Micrsooft didnt use the opportunity to create a micrsoft specific Linux distro that replaces bash with powershell, or Edit with vim, nano and other choices as well as .NET and Visual Studio Code by developer installs. M…

>Microsoft cannot dominate the Linux kernel but it can gain control in userland. Imagine if they gained traction with their applications being installed by default in popular distributions.

Yes, but how do they make money by doing this.

Unlike the socialist hiveminds that end up being behind the distros. Microsoft has salaries and bills to pay.

As far as I've always seen, everyone loves to leech on Microsoft's free stuff but nobody wants to pay for a product.

Re: Microsoft Edit

#174

Post by [deleted] »

llarsson wrote: post #94
dark-star wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As they explained, they needed a text editor that works in a command line (for Windows Core server installs), works across SSH (because for a while now Windows included an SSH Server so you can completely manage it through SSH), and can be used by non-vi-experienced Windows administrators (i.e. a modeless editor).

Telling people to use nano would of course have been next to impossible. Much easier to rewrite a DOS-era editor in Rust, naturally.

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft Edit

#175

Post by delfinom »

Geezus_42 wrote: post #153
0points wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a text editor, yes, absolutely. As developers, we rotinely need to work with large data sets, may it be gigabytes of logs, csv data, sql dump or what have you. Not being able to open and edit those files means you cant do your job.

But are you really trying to do that on a Windows Server? I feel like there are better tools for the job.

"Better tools for the job" isn't always "the tool currently bringing in the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$". So you live with it.

Sure, maybe by switching to linux you can squeeze out an extra CPU core's worth of performance after you fire your entire staff and replace them with Linux experienced developers, and then rewrite everything to work on Linux.

Or, live with it and make money money money money.

Re: Microsoft Edit

#176

Post by martinald »

masfoobar wrote: post #146

About a month ago I heard Microsoft had their own Linux distribution to help Microsoft Windows users feel more at home. From memory, it was a rather simple GNOME setup. Nothing special. I am surprised Micrsooft didnt use the opportunity to create a micrsoft specific Linux distro that replaces bash with powershell, or Edit with vim, nano and other choices as well as .NET and Visual Studio Code by developer installs. M…

I strongly suspect in time Microsoft will move to Linux, at least with things like Windows Server and embedded Windows. Then a gradual change for Windows desktop, or a sort of Windows Legacy vs Windows "Linux Workstation" desktop options. Linux kernel + some sort of 'super' WINE and a fallback tightly integrated Windows classic on a VM for certain programs.

Only problem is that the NT kernel in many ways is much better than the Linux kernel design wise (for example, the NT kernel can handle a total GPU driver crash and restore itself, which I think Linux would really struggle with - same with a lot of other drivers).

But Windows is increasingly a liability not an asset for Microsoft, especially in the server space. Their main revenue stream is Azure & Office 365 which is growing at double digits still, with Windows license growth flat.

At a minimum I'd expect a Linux based version of Windows Server and some sort of Workstation version of Windows, based on Linux.

Re: Microsoft Edit

#177

Post by delfinom »

fsniper wrote: post #81

Microsoft loves to own general terminology like "edit" for their products. I have no idea how this flys. SqlServer like it's the one that found sql or it's the only product that serves sql.

>I have no idea how this flys.

They aren't trademarking it and probably can't.

But there's no reason they anyone can't use generic naming for their products. Many software applications do and quite frankly its more descriptive to attracting new users than coming up with non-real names.

I would aruge the only reason made up names exist is to keep marketing departments employed trying to explain to users what they are needlessly.

Re: Microsoft Edit

#178

Post by naikrovek »

unsupp0rted wrote: post #170
scoopr wrote: post #166

The original edit.com, from around dos 6.22 (and later 7.0, ie. win95) was my first IDE. Well, I started with qbasic, so I was fairly familiar with it as it was similar (or same?), but when I started learning C/C++ with djgpp, I just continued using edit.com. My "project file" was `e.bat` with `edit file1.cpp file2.cpp file3.cpp`, as it was one of the few editors that I knew that had a decent multi file support with…

edit was a godsend after the `copy con` days

I remember using edlin a lot in my early computing days. It was murder to learn but once you knew how to wield it, it was excellent. I don’t know why I was forced to learn that but I needed it for something and stuck to it the entire time I used DOS for anything. And people were in awe when you used it while they watched. “What the hell was that!?”

Re: Microsoft Edit

#179

Post by joseda-hg »

cosignal wrote: post #6
scblock wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may be the written goal, but I doubt that's the actual reason the project exists.

Yeah ... I don't think there's any overlap between "users largely unfamiliar with terminals" who want something easy to use, and 'Linux users who are sufficiently technical that they would even hear about this repo'.

I dunno, I use edit since I've heard of it instead of figuring out why my vim config breaks on windows

I might use nano via wsl (Or at that point just nvim), but that also has it quirks

It occupies the same space as micro did for me, but it's / it will be preinstalled so it's better (Also a reason I even cared for vi at first)

Re: Microsoft Edit

#180

Post by naikrovek »

martinald wrote: post #176
masfoobar wrote: post #146

About a month ago I heard Microsoft had their own Linux distribution to help Microsoft Windows users feel more at home. From memory, it was a rather simple GNOME setup. Nothing special. I am surprised Micrsooft didnt use the opportunity to create a micrsoft specific Linux distro that replaces bash with powershell, or Edit with vim, nano and other choices as well as .NET and Visual Studio Code by developer installs. M…

I strongly suspect in time Microsoft will move to Linux, at least with things like Windows Server and embedded Windows. Then a gradual change for Windows desktop, or a sort of Windows Legacy vs Windows "Linux Workstation" desktop options. Linux kernel + some sort of 'super' WINE and a fallback tightly integrated Windows classic on a VM for certain programs. Only problem is that the NT kernel in many ways is much bett…

> I strongly suspect in time Microsoft will move to Linux, at least with things like Windows Server and embedded Windows.

You may not understand how important Microsoft considers backwards compatibility. Switching to a Linux kernel would eliminate all of that, and that is simply not an option for Microsoft.

The Linux kernel is missing a lot of esoteric things that the NT kernel has and that people use a lot, as well.

Windows as we use the word today (any variant) will not ever switch to a Linux kernel.

I do hope one day that Microsoft put a proper GUI on Linux though, no X, no Wayland, but something smarter and better than those. Probably also not likely to happen but I’d love to see it if they could do it well.

Post reply on HN