321–330 of 354 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I learned a bunch of Lua because of it :)
I've been thinking of that but nvim + lazyvim is so nice and easy as a text editor. I just need to figure out how to keep the shell plugin from thinking it's smarter than me and linting every single time
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Bathroom for customers only" is a completely reasonable ask from a business owner, and is what Microsoft is doing here.
That usually means bathroom access is included in the price of buying something. VS Code is free as in free beer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Lucky no-one is reliant on niche tools like NPM or GitHub, otherwise they'd be feeling mightily insecure right now. I did completely move away from GitHub (which is by now named "ShitHub" in some circles) the moment that Microsoft enforced 2FA on my account. Yes, perhaps 2FA is a good idea for many scenarios, but if some company forces it upon me, I won't have any tolerance to be willing to be their customer/user a…
I think even Microsoft is in too deep to suddenly pull the carpet on NPM/Github. Talk about a public relations nightmare
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should it be easy to start with? Hardly anything is given for free in this life, it has to be earned.
Let me clarify. You need an OS, you need compiler, you need some libraries. Unless you write all that by yourself you always build in somebodies kingdom.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's one thing for it to not be open source. It's another thing for its license to explicitly prohibit its use with any other IDE, even if it's API-compatible, even if it's literally exactly VSCode recompiled with another name. And it's yet another thing to proactively insert checks for that.
Why? If I listed an app on the google play store but intentionally limited it from working when installed by alternative means (eg someone relisting it on an alternative app store without my permission) would that be problematic? Why is this different?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? If I listed an app on the google play store but intentionally limited it from working when installed by alternative means (eg someone relisting it on an alternative app store without my permission) would that be problematic? Why is this different?
People want to be given everything for free, to be able to put the absolute least amount of effort into the code they write, in the name of “open source.”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m still dealing with the long goodbye of a silverlight app which now must be somehow ported.
if there's an escape hatch you should probably use it. In my experience companies never support you during rewrites "well why don't you just convert the code to X language" almost never works on a huge project, it takes a ground up approach, and relying on the old stuff as "more like guidelines than the actual law"
A clean rewrite isnt possible for a variety of business reasons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am quite confident that the bandwidth cost is absolutely not a concern for Microsoft, and that the obvious goal is for them to capture the market. The "C/C++" extension github repository is 4MB. Probably the download size for the extension itself is a fraction of that, but I won't bother measuring. It was downloaded 400 times over the last minute (there is a live counter on the extension page [0]). [0] https://mark…
I am glad you have insider knowledge to be so confident. I would rather those costs go towards furthering VS Code than helping out Cursor. This comes from someone who uses Cursor and not the biggest fan of MSFT. Pure speculation but I would see the more logical argument being Cursor is a for pay product, why should they have access to the marketplace?
In the age of LLMs, community is worth its weight in platinum, cutting off Cursor just incentivizes them to develop some new better thing with better technology (cough Zed, Ghostty) to compete with VS Code which won’t benefit Microsoft because it’ll be separate. What’s the use in not just open sourcing the C extension? With more people moving off C anyway, might as well get the free community contributions
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? If I listed an app on the google play store but intentionally limited it from working when installed by alternative means (eg someone relisting it on an alternative app store without my permission) would that be problematic? Why is this different?
People want to be given everything for free, to be able to put the absolute least amount of effort into the code they write, in the name of “open source.”
But open source nevertheless contributes to the commons when done well.
Compare and contrast: Free software.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am glad you have insider knowledge to be so confident. I would rather those costs go towards furthering VS Code than helping out Cursor. This comes from someone who uses Cursor and not the biggest fan of MSFT. Pure speculation but I would see the more logical argument being Cursor is a for pay product, why should they have access to the marketplace?
> why should they have access to the marketplace Because MS didn’t write most of the extensions yet engineered things conveniently such that you have to use their service to get them. Other text editors somehow manage to not lock people into similar dilemmas. They’re not profiting from running the marketplace or providing VS Code for free, it’s about locking people into a product. Cursor should be allowed access beca…