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

CoreCLR is now open source

blogs.msdn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 347 posts

Re: CoreCLR is now open source

#241

Post by fsloth »

jsprogrammer wrote: post #205
WorldWideWayne wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why everything needs to be open source. People who simply don't like Microsoft will not use it just because it's open. Quite the opposite I think - they'd probably immediately fork it and provide an alternate download in order to hurt Microsoft. Are foreign governments a big market that Microsoft has lost a lot of customers from? I don't think so. The vast majority of the potential market for Windows is a…

>I don't see why everything needs to be open source. I think this goes back to one of the core tenets of free and/or open source software: the user should be able to know, control, and modify exactly what their machine is doing. If the source is not available you're just running a black box and praying that it will do what the person who gave it to you claims it will do.

"If the source is not available you're just running a black box and praying that it will do what the person who gave it to you claims it will do."

I'm sorry to point out to you but a large set of computing devices are black boxes and it does not hurt their marketability. Cars, phones (the OS running the hardware, not Android), ... the pilot in the passenger plane does not want to hack his planes OS, nor most likely does the mechanics crew.

Practically, lots of people just want to get their job/art project/email/browsing done and do not care about the blackness of the box just as long as it works.

I think one of the reasons RMS got going was that he was irritated that the software from vendors did not work.

The software markets have advanced some what. Nowadays, for any product with a sizeable market it is fairly safe to presume the software works or at least won't fail miserably. And if it does, it's not just the lone consumer but thousands/million others who are pissed off as well. Yeah, crap gets released though.

Re: CoreCLR is now open source

#244

Post by jaked89 »

fsloth wrote: post #239
jaked89 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Velocity? Only for simple, boring UI. Any non-standard control requires GDI+ rendering, which is not very maintainable. WPF offers a far superior composition ability.

I agree I would not suggest doing anything non-standard with it. And yes, it looks dated and ugly. But in some places visual appearance of widgets is not that important. Often, boring UI:s are good . The tool should fade into the background and let the user focus on getting her work done. While I love shiny things the real world accepts good enough solutions that are economic to develop. Theoretically I just adore WP…

"Non-standard" doesn't necessarily mean "shiny". Often you need to compose elements in a way that makes a certain UI feature possible, or convenient. Such compositions aren't inherently shiny; they can even be ugly. But functional.

In WF it's very hard & tedious.

Re: CoreCLR is now open source

#245

Post by sanatgersappa »

Raphael wrote: post #25
stevecalifornia wrote: post #18

I am really interested to see what happens once ASP.Net is running on Linux. C# and Visual Studio are fantastic, mature tools and I think a lot of developers would enjoy using them whereas they might be hesitant at the moment due to OS lock-in on the code they are writing.

Could/Does Visual Studio run in Linux?

No. But check out http://www.omnisharp.net/

Re: CoreCLR is now open source

#246

Post by snambi »

dragonshed wrote: post #231
otakucode wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, Ballmer's managerial approach is what killed it. He might have known that helping developers was the way to go, but he also thought that competition in the organization would lead to better performance. My understanding is that this idea failed in some of the most vicious and destructive ways possible. I hope that the very visible failure of his cut-throat management style and setting up so many disinc…

Indeed. I'm reminded of this org chart comparison... http://www.bonkersworld.net/organizational-charts/

very funny.

Re: CoreCLR is now open source

#247

Post by chinpokomon »

derefr wrote: post #180
WorldWideWayne wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why everything needs to be open source. People who simply don't like Microsoft will not use it just because it's open. Quite the opposite I think - they'd probably immediately fork it and provide an alternate download in order to hurt Microsoft. Are foreign governments a big market that Microsoft has lost a lot of customers from? I don't think so. The vast majority of the potential market for Windows is a…

The first and biggest effect (presuming a GPL-compatible license) is that Wine would suddenly work much better, and so Ubuntu and OSX would likely ship their following versions with "the ability to run Windows software alongside native software with no performance loss" as a feature. OSX N+3 or so might even eliminate Boot Camp, saying that there's no need to install Windows as a whole if all the software "Just Works…

Then why would anyone build native applications when Windows apps would be WORA? The only incentive I see for Apple is that they are in many ways a hardware company first. They want to sell hardware and this is one reason they haven't feared bootcanp.

Years ago I saw a demo of a Windows subsystem running an ELF Apache server directly on Windows NT. It isn't anything that Microsoft would release though, because once you make it so Windows can run Linux applications, who is going to write Windows apps? It erodes the platform.

I see an official WINE for OSX, that has a perfectly working subsystem, introducing the same problems to that ecosystem.

Re: CoreCLR is now open source

#249

Post by ziahamza »

edwinnathaniel wrote: post #87
frik wrote: post #3

Next step, WinForms

I'm still waiting for a good cross-platform UI toolkit with good tools and ecosystems around it without resorting to C++ (Qt) or JS approach (atom/nw). C++ tooling is behind its time (CMake, no dependency management) and JS approach seems kludgy right now. Java was pretty close (JDK .. or NetBeans, support packaging to Windows or Mac AppStore) but the UI component for OSX is not pleasing and would be nice if it can p…

I agree. Xamarin guys have done a great job at delivering cross platform UI, making C# first class on most platform, but their API's still lag behind .Net official framework and are stuck to the .Net 4.0 era.

Re: CoreCLR is now open source

#250

Post by rdtsc »

throwawaykf05 wrote: post #240
rdtsc wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it comes to propaganda from large and powerful entities, usually it help to reverse the meaning to really understand the message. "Developers,developers,developer" = Fuck developers,need more profits next quarter. "We brought peace and democracy to country " = We seriously fucked it up for years to come, and installed a brutal puppet dictator. "We are not evil like those other mean companies. We will do good in…

Except I don't think this is true of Ballmer when it came to "developers, developers, developers". I doubt Microsoft has willingly done anything to harm developers that use its products, certainly not for "profits next quarter". Sure, they deprecated some technologies (like Silverlight), but that was in response to market realities (like the iPhone and HTML5), and even then they are supported for years. All the vario…

That culture he instilled has been going on for enough time for him to realize that maybe it is time to reverse or change the policy. If he cared enough, they would have been looking and doing something about it.

Now as you say, would that have made the difference? It is hard to say...

Post reply on HN