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

Microsoft open-sources Graph Engine

graphengine.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 192 posts

Re: Microsoft open-sources Graph Engine

#181

Post by webmaven »

orionblastar wrote: post #138
webmaven wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Microsoft of 2017 makes me forget about Microsoft of 1997. Never Forget.

Trust but verify. Microsoft has changed over the years and is not the same company in 1997. It used to hate FOSS projects and now they contribute to them. MSFT used to hate Linux and now they embrace it adding Ubuntu support to Windows 10. Sure never forget, but if you see changes for the better, learn how to forgive. If they go back to the way they were in 1997, just speak up about it. Microsoft adapted to tablets w…

> if you see changes for the better, learn how to forgive

Sure, I'll consider doing so when an Office user can set OpenOffice as the default format, or at least when they open an OpenOffice file, that Office will save that file as OpenOffice by default.

I guess this comes down to Microsoft failing basic verification.

Re: Microsoft open-sources Graph Engine

#182

Post by orionblastar »

webmaven wrote: post #181
orionblastar wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trust but verify. Microsoft has changed over the years and is not the same company in 1997. It used to hate FOSS projects and now they contribute to them. MSFT used to hate Linux and now they embrace it adding Ubuntu support to Windows 10. Sure never forget, but if you see changes for the better, learn how to forgive. If they go back to the way they were in 1997, just speak up about it. Microsoft adapted to tablets w…

> if you see changes for the better, learn how to forgive Sure, I'll consider doing so when an Office user can set OpenOffice as the default format, or at least when they open an OpenOffice file, that Office will save that file as OpenOffice by default. I guess this comes down to Microsoft failing basic verification.

I remember there was a setting in 2007 or 2010 to change the default document standard but I forgot how it worked.

You can set OpenOffice or LibreOffice for document default types in Windows.

I like Libreoffice because it does more file standards than MS Office. Someone emailed a Word Perfect document to a group my wife was in and MS Office could not open it. So I used LibreOffice to open it and convert it to Doc format for my wife so her group can use it.

Re: Microsoft open-sources Graph Engine

#183

Post by webmaven »

orionblastar wrote: post #182
webmaven wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you see changes for the better, learn how to forgive Sure, I'll consider doing so when an Office user can set OpenOffice as the default format, or at least when they open an OpenOffice file, that Office will save that file as OpenOffice by default. I guess this comes down to Microsoft failing basic verification.

I remember there was a setting in 2007 or 2010 to change the default document standard but I forgot how it worked. You can set OpenOffice or LibreOffice for document default types in Windows. I like Libreoffice because it does more file standards than MS Office. Someone emailed a Word Perfect document to a group my wife was in and MS Office could not open it. So I used LibreOffice to open it and convert it to Doc for…

> there was a setting in 2007 or 2010 to change the default document standard but I forgot how it worked.

TL/DR: Badly.

OK, it looks like it has been possible to set the default file types to Open Document Formats for several years, I just hadn't noticed.

But I naively thought that with that capability would come support for more MS Office features when saving in ODF, or at least that features not supported by MS Office in ODF would be disabled or hidden if ODF is set as the default to keep users from shooting themselves in the foot.

How silly of me:

https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Differences-between...

https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Differences-between...

https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Supported-features-...

Basically, even if you set ODF as the default, if you use a feature that is not supported (such as putting a table in a presentation slide) everything looks fine until you hit save. Saving the file saves a downgraded version of your work (a table on a slide is converted to an image), and you probably only get one warning pop-up that says "some features may not be supported". I bet the still-open file continues to look and act fine. No, the problems with the saved file are only apparent much later.

Imagine the user's surprise when they re-open their presentation deck file (remember, created and saved in MS Office) the next day and many aspects of their work on that presentation were never saved or have been downgraded to uselessness...

And that doesn't even address the fact that many of these "unsupported" features are ones that ODF actually supports perfectly well, but that Microsoft just hasn't implemented for saving in ODF.

My, what an exceptionally lovely user experience that is. It just oozes good faith and sincerity of effort toward interoperability, doesn't it?

Re: Microsoft open-sources Graph Engine

#184

Post by greggyb »

webmaven wrote: post #180
scott_karana wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I may paraphrase: "Never forget that large monopolies can wield disgusting influence, but don't let hate for past monopolies blind you to modern monopolies either" :-)

> don't let hate for past monopolies blind you to modern monopolies either Just because Microsoft is no longer the monopoly-du-jour, doesn't mean they aren't still a monopoly... Just because they have been making (successful) forays into open-source, does not mean they won't still fiercely protect (with whatever means at their disposal) their monopoly cash cows (Windows and Office). The "standartization" of Office Op…

Windows is a legitimate cash cow, but because of server installs. Office makes a lot of money; SQL Server and other datacenter products make much more.

Re: Microsoft open-sources Graph Engine

#185

Post by webmaven »

greggyb wrote: post #184
webmaven wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don't let hate for past monopolies blind you to modern monopolies either Just because Microsoft is no longer the monopoly-du-jour, doesn't mean they aren't still a monopoly... Just because they have been making (successful) forays into open-source, does not mean they won't still fiercely protect (with whatever means at their disposal) their monopoly cash cows (Windows and Office). The "standartization" of Office Op…

Windows is a legitimate cash cow, but because of server installs. Office makes a lot of money; SQL Server and other datacenter products make much more.

> Windows is a legitimate cash cow, but because of server installs. Office makes a lot of money; SQL Server and other datacenter products make much more.

And yet on the server Microsoft does not have a monopoly.

Consider that the main reason Microsoft has a profitable business selling server software is because of their desktop monopolies through many diverse paths.

Re: Microsoft open-sources Graph Engine

#186

Post by billrobertson42 »

dagw wrote: post #161
dingo_bat wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I do not think they will give up Window for free Win 10 was free.

Win 10 was free. It was a time limited free upgrade for people who already had a valid windows license. I don't think it it was free.

Whether they wanted it or not!

Re: Microsoft open-sources Graph Engine

#187

Post by webmaven »

prirun wrote: post #173
dingo_bat wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I do not think they will give up Window for free Win 10 was free.

So was Microsoft Office when they were trying to put Lotus, Wordperfect, and every other word processor and spreadsheet out of business. And they succeeded. Follow the pied piper boys and girls...

Don't forget "DOS ain't done until Lotus won't run!"

Re: Microsoft open-sources Graph Engine

#188

Post by ed_blackburn »

dogma1138 wrote: post #7
bluejekyll wrote: post #5

At this rate, are we going to see Windows open-sourced? MS is on a roll. My bias since 1996 is being eroded with each OSS release they have, and multi-platform targeted support. I started using VSCode regularly as my main Rust IDE, and I feel dirty for liking it. It's seemless across macOS and Linux.

I don't see MSFT benefiting from open sourcing windows, so likely never.

Perhaps some elements.

The kernel? The more platforms the better?

Re: Microsoft open-sources Graph Engine

#189

Post by webmaven »

kensai wrote: post #122

I still like the neat Pajek. Nifty little piece of software, unknown by most, but really powerful! Especially if you are into social network analysis. Who else uses it? http://mrvar.fdv.uni-lj.si/pajek/

Never heard of it before, and wow, that page is seriously old-school.

Re: Microsoft open-sources Graph Engine

#190

Post by bitcrazed »

Analemma_ wrote: post #114
yulaow wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I ask you where I can find their roadmap about it? Very interested recently

I don't know if there's a single document somewhere with an explicit roadmap. Their GitHub page ( https://github.com/Microsoft/BashOnWindows ) includes links to multiple sources that could collectively be considered a sort of roadmap, including the Issue tracker, UserVoice page, team blog, and discussion forums. I've also asked the devs questions on Twitter a couple times (like @richturn_ms) and usually gotten fast r…

You called? ;)

Also take a look at our Command-line blog (https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/commandline) for LOTS more about Console & Bash/WSL, including the page where I pull together our various learning resources into one place: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/commandline/learn-about-bas...

Regarding roadmap, to be honest, we don't really have one, but we do have a primary mission which we're laser-focused on: Make Windows Subsystem for Linux able to run the vast majority of tools developers need to get their work done.

We've taken a somewhat unusual, but HIGHLY valuable approach of building features based almost entirely on feedback from the community. We prioritize syscall implementation based on the frequency with which we see failures due to missing, incomplete, or incorrect syscalls. This way, we focus on delivering the most bang for the buck.

This said, now that our syscall coverage is starting to edge towards covering the majority of mainstream dev tools, we're starting to look at more strategic, features including improving disk perf & support for networking, device, etc.

We'll be publishing more details in a few weeks on our blog above (and, of course via https://twitter.com/richturn_ms) on where we're going to invest effort beyond Creators Update. Look forward to hearing from y'all ;)

Post reply on HN