101–110 of 123 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What UI framework should I be focusing on in 2023? Should I focus on web-based framework (vis-a-vis Electron or similar platform) or is there something more suitable for desktop UI?
For Go, I just picked up Fyne. Deploys natively on all relevant targets, with a consistent UI across platforms.
We're a dotnet shop and we're looking to rewrite our iOS and Android apps in a cross platform framework. On paper MAUI seems like the perfect fit but reading through the discussion and issues in GitHub it's nearly guaranteed this will go the way of all MS's UI products. The number of unresolved issues for fairly basic functionality and the number of developers voicing their PTSD from MAUI related development has made…
Three decades of experience talking here: If you don't see a vendor like Microsoft using a GUI framework for at least 50% of their new applications, then you've made a terrible mistake in adopting it yourself. Microsoft uses Google's framework for their own applications: Electron. Yes, you heard me right. Microsoft, a nearly 3 trillion dollar company, uses the framework of a competitor for their own desktop applicati…
> Microsoft uses Google's framework for their own applications: Electron. Electron is built on top of Google's Chromium but developed by a completely different set of people at GitHub initially for their text editor Atom. Later GitHub got acquired by Microsoft.
That said, OP's point is crystal clear, these silly new platform projects are the busywork of vestigial orgs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Correct, I've only heard this from two people and this is only their take. This is not an official position. But the fact that people within the company are saying this to me directly is enough to get me to believe it. I wouldn't trust a random person on the internet saying stuff like this either, but even without any inside knowledge, it's just logical that they should try and limit time spent developing two of the…
We would have migrated to GitHub, unfortunately it doesn't have the equivalent backlog management that's in Azure DevOps.
And obviously, grain of salt, third-hand knowledge, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dev with agency here. There is clearly an issue, but "agile" is not it. "Agile" doesn’t mean "ship unfinished products and never care for issues". In fact, it means quite the opposite: Start with as little as possible, as polished as possible and improve from there. It's actually quite nice to work with, if every role is on the same page.
I wonder where you've found that definition of "agile". The agile manifesto says that they have come to value: 1. Individuals and interactions over processes and tools 2. Working software over comprehensive documentation 3. Customer collaboration over contract negotiation 4. Responding to change over following a plan There is no direct quality/polishness in there. Edit: formatting
Three decades of experience talking here: If you don't see a vendor like Microsoft using a GUI framework for at least 50% of their new applications, then you've made a terrible mistake in adopting it yourself. Microsoft uses Google's framework for their own applications: Electron. Yes, you heard me right. Microsoft, a nearly 3 trillion dollar company, uses the framework of a competitor for their own desktop applicati…
I remember a similar argument against Visual SourceSafe[0]. We had been using SS since it was done by OneTree (borged by MS). MS used an internal tool, instead. VSS did do one cool trick, which I have yet to see replicated elsewhere: You could construct "artificial workspaces," composed of elements (down to individual files) in other workspaces, so, when you checked out (it was all checkout/checkin, back then), you a…
I understand it used the same storage engine as a number of other Microsoft products, including Exchange, which had the same bug.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember a similar argument against Visual SourceSafe[0]. We had been using SS since it was done by OneTree (borged by MS). MS used an internal tool, instead. VSS did do one cool trick, which I have yet to see replicated elsewhere: You could construct "artificial workspaces," composed of elements (down to individual files) in other workspaces, so, when you checked out (it was all checkout/checkin, back then), you a…
The main criticism I heard of Visual SourceSafe was that if your repository got bigger than 2GB it would be irretrievably corrupted. I understand it used the same storage engine as a number of other Microsoft products, including Exchange, which had the same bug.
It was a straight file-based system; run entirely from the client. No server component.
You mounted a server drive onto your desktop, pointed VSS at it, and then fixed a four-course meal, while it synced.
No server. For a shared VSS.
I’m not surprised MS didn’t use it.
Three decades of experience talking here: If you don't see a vendor like Microsoft using a GUI framework for at least 50% of their new applications, then you've made a terrible mistake in adopting it yourself. Microsoft uses Google's framework for their own applications: Electron. Yes, you heard me right. Microsoft, a nearly 3 trillion dollar company, uses the framework of a competitor for their own desktop applicati…
!! _That is exactly_ one of the reasons why I jumped from Windows to Mac! Back in the Windows 8 days. So much more consistency API-wise and much less fear of your favorite thing being abandoned!
Apple actually uses their own shit, unlike Microsoft internal warfare that would make the Sengoku period seem like a kiddy playground.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The main criticism I heard of Visual SourceSafe was that if your repository got bigger than 2GB it would be irretrievably corrupted. I understand it used the same storage engine as a number of other Microsoft products, including Exchange, which had the same bug.
It was awful. It was a straight file-based system; run entirely from the client. No server component. You mounted a server drive onto your desktop, pointed VSS at it, and then fixed a four-course meal, while it synced. No server. For a shared VSS. I’m not surprised MS didn’t use it.
That, and the slow speed, were my two memories of the product. But I admit the last time I used VSS was back in 1996, or so.