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

Things Microsoft Still Does Well

techland.time.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 50 posts

Re: Things Microsoft Still Does Well

#11

Post by lelandbatey »

rtfeldman wrote: post #8
fiatmoney wrote: post #4

Microsoft's enterprise software is really, really good. Active Directory, SQL Server, Azure, C# and Visual Studio are all amazing. They also make tons of money, and MS is really good at managing them as cash cows over time. Not coincidentally, they just put the Cloud and Enterprise guy in charge of the company.

I keep hearing this, but it's just such a foreign concept to me. The idea of - for lack of a better term - surrendering my entire development stack to a single company rings just about every alarm bell in my head. What happens when (say) .NET isn't the best tool for a particular job? Just close your eyes and use the inferior tool anyway? Or use the right tool and just throw the hard-won Microsoft ecosystem synergies…

I started programming in C# this past month entirely due to a new project I'm working on, and at first I totally felt the same way. I honestly felt like Visual Studio had a higher learning curve than any other tool I've ever used, and I've been using Vim for the past year : )

What made it worse was that prior to this I'd never really programmed anything for Windows.

However, as I've been using it more and more, I'm beginning to see why it is the way it is, how all this abstraction and scaffolding comes together to make programming easier.

Seriously, having everything a developer could ever want accessible through one interface has some nice upsides, and I now completely see how Microsoft makes so much money off this product.

Also, I think one of the things that makes. NET so attractive is that it seems to have features or libraries for everything and the kitchen sink. C# has excellent support for "business-y" things, to a degree that makes worrying about it not a problem for many companies.

Re: Things Microsoft Still Does Well

#12

Post by mbesto »

rtfeldman wrote: post #8
fiatmoney wrote: post #4

Microsoft's enterprise software is really, really good. Active Directory, SQL Server, Azure, C# and Visual Studio are all amazing. They also make tons of money, and MS is really good at managing them as cash cows over time. Not coincidentally, they just put the Cloud and Enterprise guy in charge of the company.

I keep hearing this, but it's just such a foreign concept to me. The idea of - for lack of a better term - surrendering my entire development stack to a single company rings just about every alarm bell in my head. What happens when (say) .NET isn't the best tool for a particular job? Just close your eyes and use the inferior tool anyway? Or use the right tool and just throw the hard-won Microsoft ecosystem synergies…

(just try to paint some perspective here not disagreeing)

Imagine all you've used is Microsoft's products and all of sudden some hotshot programmer comes along and says "we're going to use this software that a bunch of people wrote for free" Now that is a foreign concept.

Re: Things Microsoft Still Does Well

#13

Post by blntechie »

rtfeldman wrote: post #8
fiatmoney wrote: post #4

Microsoft's enterprise software is really, really good. Active Directory, SQL Server, Azure, C# and Visual Studio are all amazing. They also make tons of money, and MS is really good at managing them as cash cows over time. Not coincidentally, they just put the Cloud and Enterprise guy in charge of the company.

I keep hearing this, but it's just such a foreign concept to me. The idea of - for lack of a better term - surrendering my entire development stack to a single company rings just about every alarm bell in my head. What happens when (say) .NET isn't the best tool for a particular job? Just close your eyes and use the inferior tool anyway? Or use the right tool and just throw the hard-won Microsoft ecosystem synergies…

Enterprise IT departments are diverse as well. They are not monolithic as we portray it to be.

I've not seen any big non-tech company totally dependent on one programming stack. They spread their bets. One can see people sitting next to each other working on Node.js and Visual Basic.

If anything to go by what I've seen and provided competent people are making the decision, they try to use right tools for the right job.

Re: Things Microsoft Still Does Well

#14

Post by rahimnathwani »

uvTwitch wrote: post #9
tdicola wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed--I think the living room 'hub' is DOA in a world of smartphones and tablets. Why would I want to mess around with some clunky 10 foot interface when I can just pull my phone out of my pocket or pick up the tablet on my coffee table?

You may be content with a 10 inch screen, but I live in a flat of 24-28year olds, and my xbox sees more use as a youtube player than it does as a gaming device. My flatmates are content to search for things using the awful controller text input to play them on the tv rather than use the laptops sitting right in front of them. I'd tell them about SmartGlass, but I doubt they'd use it.

Why would they use an xbox for YouTube rather than using a tablet in conjunction with an Apple TV or Chromecast? Is it just because the xbox is already there and always turned on?

Re: Things Microsoft Still Does Well

#15

Post by [deleted] »

blntechie wrote: post #13
rtfeldman wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep hearing this, but it's just such a foreign concept to me. The idea of - for lack of a better term - surrendering my entire development stack to a single company rings just about every alarm bell in my head. What happens when (say) .NET isn't the best tool for a particular job? Just close your eyes and use the inferior tool anyway? Or use the right tool and just throw the hard-won Microsoft ecosystem synergies…

Enterprise IT departments are diverse as well. They are not monolithic as we portray it to be. I've not seen any big non-tech company totally dependent on one programming stack. They spread their bets. One can see people sitting next to each other working on Node.js and Visual Basic. If anything to go by what I've seen and provided competent people are making the decision, they try to use right tools for the right jo…

[deleted]

Re: Things Microsoft Still Does Well

#16

Post by us0r »

rtfeldman wrote: post #8
fiatmoney wrote: post #4

Microsoft's enterprise software is really, really good. Active Directory, SQL Server, Azure, C# and Visual Studio are all amazing. They also make tons of money, and MS is really good at managing them as cash cows over time. Not coincidentally, they just put the Cloud and Enterprise guy in charge of the company.

I keep hearing this, but it's just such a foreign concept to me. The idea of - for lack of a better term - surrendering my entire development stack to a single company rings just about every alarm bell in my head. What happens when (say) .NET isn't the best tool for a particular job? Just close your eyes and use the inferior tool anyway? Or use the right tool and just throw the hard-won Microsoft ecosystem synergies…

Look at it from a Fortune 500 perspective (yes obviously exceptions and I'm not saying I agree or disagree). Do we want to run all or part of our business on an open source tool/project which may or may not have a large community around it and may or may not be around tomorrow or do we use the company who is financially committed to X tool and has virtually unlimited money in the bank?

This doesn't just apply to Microsoft... look at the money Oracle, IBM, SAP, etc. bring in. As the saying goes "No one has been fired for using X software before".

"What happens when (say) .NET isn't the best tool for a particular job?"

So like when you need to write something in Python (http://pytools.codeplex.com/) or Node.js (http://nodejstools.codeplex.com/)? Yea that is all supported in VS by Microsoft. Most people don't realize at some point over the last few years they changed from the MS or screw off attitude to a more let's support what we can one. They have also started opening sourcing a lot of their stuff.

I came from Unix/Linux/PHP and Perl at the time and once I got the hang of C# and Visual Studio I have not looked back.

Re: Things Microsoft Still Does Well

#17

Post by tonyedgecombe »

Einstalbert wrote: post #10
rtfeldman wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep hearing this, but it's just such a foreign concept to me. The idea of - for lack of a better term - surrendering my entire development stack to a single company rings just about every alarm bell in my head. What happens when (say) .NET isn't the best tool for a particular job? Just close your eyes and use the inferior tool anyway? Or use the right tool and just throw the hard-won Microsoft ecosystem synergies…

"Oops we developed our product on Silverlight because we're an MS-kit company and now Silverlight is crap. Now what?"

The fact that Microsoft stopped developing a technology that hardly anybody used isn't a surprise, I don't know of any business that would keep supporting something that was so obviously not going to succeed.

Re: Things Microsoft Still Does Well

#18

Post by pimeys »

Svip wrote: post #7

Yes, the Xbox 360 has been a success in the US (beating the PS3), but in every other market than the US, the PS3 has beaten the Xbox 360.[1] And the article in question is very US-centric on that regard. I am not saying the Xbox is necessarily bad, but is it better than the PlayStation? I think that's rather subjective. Although I hear that neither Sony nor Microsoft has made a lot of money from their console adventu…

My problem with Xbox 360 is it's selection of games. My wife bought the console for us two years ago and the only games we've played with it have been Skyrim and GTA V, which are also available for PS3. Almost all of the games available are in this so called 'dudebro' category: fps, sports etc.

What are missing are the japanese weird and arty, or colorful and playable games that are available for Playstation or Wii. The games I remember from my childhood (Mario, Zelda) or some absolutely mindblowing ideas like Journey.

Re: Things Microsoft Still Does Well

#19

Post by asadotzler »

It's time to stop joking about IE like that. IE 11 is a fine Web browser these days. Yes, it took them a while to catch back up, but they have and they're a genuinely modern browser today. Firefox is still a better browser, for a good number of reasons, not the least of which is Mozilla's mission to put users and the health of the Internet first, but Microsoft engineers working on IE for the last few years deserve more credit than they're getting. Shouldn't we be cheering for them to build the best they can instead of insulting them?

Re: Things Microsoft Still Does Well

#20

Post by beagle3 »

asadotzler wrote: post #19

It's time to stop joking about IE like that. IE 11 is a fine Web browser these days. Yes, it took them a while to catch back up, but they have and they're a genuinely modern browser today. Firefox is still a better browser, for a good number of reasons, not the least of which is Mozilla's mission to put users and the health of the Internet first, but Microsoft engineers working on IE for the last few years deserve mo…

> Shouldn't we be cheering for them to build the best they can instead of insulting them?

No, we shouldn't. Do you have any reason to believe that if IE became dominant again, Microsoft would not abuse its position once more? I don't. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice ....

(And I wasn't fooled even once, but the Internet at large was).

The onus of proving that they mean well is on Microsoft this time, and they're not living up to it. Ok then, I guess IE11 is an ok HTML5 browser (don't have windows, can't even test). But they fought against introducing WebGL (and lost), and they're still reluctant to introduce WebRTC.

Post reply on HN