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

Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

pedrocr.pt

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 421 posts

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#381

Post by Aperocky »

stiray wrote: post #217
Aperocky wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

tbf, those workflow probably can be replaced by a much better alternative. The only downside is people who wouldn’t learn a newer system of interaction with their computer. It’s like 737 Max8 except that mistakes and problems won’t cause lives to be lost.

Please, do suggest it. I, personally dont see a product group in oss that would function in that manner. Yes, you can set up LibreOffice with postfix, dovecot, nextcloud (with sh__load of plugins),... But the integration of it, even after some serious scripting is nowhere near from the microsoft solutions. You only have a bunch of lonely programs knowing how to do their job... more or less... well but completely unaw…

I actually agree with you. But I think the need for office software is grossly exaggerated. There’s no reason how one couldn’t articulate reason as well in a markdown file. Excel is the only thing remotely useful but even that can be replaced with pandas. The whole workflow itself - the fancy stuff, is unnecessary complex.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#382

Post by Nullabillity »

fhery wrote: post #340
Nullabillity wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wow, you must've been trying hard to cherry pick those. Not really. Just try keeping a .NET/MSSQL environment running for a few days, and the stories will build up quickly. > SSMS is mature, reliable and makes my life easier meanwhile pgAdmin is just viable, but nothing more. But psql is good enough that I pretty much never have to touch pgAdmin. And for ad-hoc editing (the only case where graphical editors have an…

What about copying data between databases? I couldnt get it right in pg, meanwhile works fine in SQL Server Also pgAdmin has no(?) Intellisense.

> What about copying data between databases? I couldnt get it right in pg, meanwhile works fine in SQL Server

Export to SQL with pg_dump[0], or export to CSV with COPY[1] or \copy[2].

> Also pgAdmin has no(?) Intellisense.

Press ctrl+space for auto-complete. It also seems to pop up when you press `.` (in a valid place).

psql follows the more typical convention of auto-completing on tab.

[0]: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/app-pgdump.html

[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-copy.html

[2]: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/app-psql.html#APP-PS...

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#383

Post by oaiey »

tomxor wrote: post #379
oaiey wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is crazy. Because NT is an excellent kernel done by a industry legend (David Cutler). It runs on 80%+ of all desktop, is the grid below a cloud platform, is a game console and has a track record of being flexible enough to run on microcontrollers, phones, etc. And the complete hardware industry supports it. There is no reason to switch to Linux, considering that they would need to reinvent the whole UI stack of…

> they would need to reinvent the whole UI stack of Linux like MacOS did. MacOS X is not based on Linux or GNU and it's UI evolved out of a combination of Next technology and features combined with re-implemented classic Mac OS features. So it wasn't exactly a clean slate. More relevantly though, they put some effort into maintaining compatibility with programs written for their previous OS by both porting their APIs…

Yeah, you nail the point: there is no incentive. There is no benefit for them into it. Exactly my point.

The rest of their business is where the money is. Office runs one way or the other out of the web, on Android, iOS or macOS.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#384

Post by dredmorbius »

yellowapple wrote: post #354
dredmorbius wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft have an established track record of offering, then withdrawing, MS Office for alternate platforms (or refusing to offer it at all). I seem to recall that there was an Office version for Sun Microsystem's Solaris, which is 99.99...% of the way to a Linux variant. That was killed. (This may have been MSIE or an Exchange-compatible email client, I'm researching this still.) OSX is better supported, though for…

> This may have been MSIE Indeed it was: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_for_UNIX

Thanks. That was part of it.

I think I may also have been recalling Wabi, a Windows Application Binary Interface for Solaris, effectively rather like Wine, I believe.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wabi_(software)

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#385

Post by IcePic »

dredmorbius wrote: post #343
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>an [MS] Office version for Sun Microsystem's Solaris // Are you sure you're not thinking of StarOffice, which became OpenOffice.org which begat LibreOffice. That was Sun's answer to MS Office, supposedly started by realising it was cheaper to buy a company that made an office suite and develop it in-house than it was to pay MS for their suite.

I'm positive it wasn't Staroffice. I know that story ... painfully ... well. It might not have been MS office, but MSIE or a specific application. I'm finding researching this online disappointingly fruitless, though I've got inquiries in a few spots.

I think MSIE and the Windows Media player appeared for Solaris for a really short while at least. Outlook Express too, it seems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_for_UNIX

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#386

Post by dredmorbius »

cwyers wrote: post #352
dredmorbius wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Precisely my point. The tiger rarely changes its stripes.

Microsoft isn't a tiger, it's a group of people. There is some continuity, but the people making those decisions are not the same people making those decisions now.

https://www.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_meaning_of_the_phrase_...

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#387

Post by headmelted »

FpUser wrote: post #221
headmelted wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think sales figures support the notion that everyone has a laptop at all but I’d be happy to stand corrected.

I have few laptops. One is very old, 5-6 years I think gaming Asus. It still runs all titles just fine. If I was not a programmer why would I upgrade from that one? This can obviously make people upgrade less.

Right but you’re a programmer on HN (same as most of us here I’d assume).

My point was that we’re not typical users - most users don’t use a traditional computer outside of work anymore as the phone fills that gap for them.

Microsoft isn’t threatened by Linux because they have way bigger things to focus on these days - ubiquitous mobile devices and proving Windows’ relevance in an age of web browsers everywhere.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#388

Post by headmelted »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #175
baybal2 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when? That's nonsense. Browser and a whole operating system are two different things

You're talking to SV web devs who's careers depend on and are entirely focused on web tech.

Exactly.

I sometimes wonder if people are so in the bubble that they don’t realize we’re rarely the audience.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#389

Post by rcarmo »

I’m going to add a data point here: I work at Microsoft and my primary e-mail client is... Firefox. The Outlook web UI is so good these days that the UX for mail, viewing attachments and booking meetings is much, much better than the native app (which I only use for ensuring I have an offline database when traveling).

And yeah, I use WSL extensively, and work from a Mac at home. There is a lot more to the story than the article covers.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#390

Post by juststeve »

fhery wrote: post #342
juststeve wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you type Install-Package in Visual Studio, sometimes it just fails to find the package at all. You have to search for it first, then type Install-Package, and then it actually downloads etc.

I'm always doing it via Nuget Package Manager and I don't remember having any troubles with that I'm using dotnet's CLI mostly for migrations/publishing

Yeah i think package manager GUI is ok? but cli and powershell, not so much
Post reply on HN