Also, I read a lot of comments saying this way good for mono ... how is this ? Wouldn't an open source CLR be more useful ?
Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler
401–410 of 459 posts
Re: Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler
#402Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right, how could I forget the iPad, the thing is the business model they have for all of their products is unsustainable. The iPad is doing well now, just as the iPhone did initially, but less and less people are buying the iPhone because the Android environment has had time to develop. Even chromebooks out sold mac books [1] in 2013. A lot of companies allow developers to use Linux too. The fact that people w…
I know Chromebooks outsold MacBooks but I don't think you can compare them. Chromebooks are like disposable cameras. If they are referring to the cheapy plastic things, I wonder if people are buying them as devices to use whilst on the toilet or in areas where mugging is a risk? Most Chromebooks are glorified phone hardware. Even the one with the whizzbang screen has lousy soldered-on local storage, so it fails as a…
Re: Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler
#403Earlier quoted context omitted.
Start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_Documents Continue here if you feel extraordinarily ambitious: http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=2007021720... (Comes vs. Microsoft)
Damn, give it a break those Halloween Documents were over 10 years ago. The pricing thing is one bit, Microsoft hasn't really been too shy about that, but neither has Intel. The whole bundling of IE - how else did you expect someone to browse the web? I don't get it. People don't want IE in Windows yet can never give an answer of how people will get anything else. Then Microsoft has to give people choice. Such a voca…
Re: Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler
#404Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's because the installer packages stink. WiX is a far better platform.
I've been out of the Windows deployment ecosystem for ages. What's the benefit of using WiX over nsis?
Re: Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler
#405Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would also add that Google, Apple, Facebook and others are hardly without their track records of "profound fuckery"... and yet it's only Microsoft for which the knee-jerk reaction to any bit of news seems to be "it sucks."
Oh come on, did you miss the huge backlash when fb took over occulus rift? And Google get a lot of shit for closing much used and loved services. But Microsoft wanted to remove the open web, in favour of all their proprietary services, such as Active-X. Places like South Korea foolishly followed the MS paradigm, and they are suffering for it now. Microsoft wanted to control everything, and kill Linux and over open so…
Re: Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler
#406Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why did they get rid of Installer Projects? We are still on VS2010 and although it isn't a massive issue to use a different installer system, it seems a very odd decision. I mean, you are writing apps for their OS using their tools. Why wouldn't you want to create an installer? Daft!
It's because the installer packages stink. WiX is a far better platform.
There is no straightforward migration path from vdproj to WiX, either. It's a case of re-writing all of your deployment code (which has already been tested/tweaked/hacked on for years) for no upfront benefit.
Re: Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler
#407Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple took advantage of things that were already open source. How many innovative, profitable programs has it developed itself and then made open source? The fact that the core OS is still open source doesn't actually mean much when there's a huge layer of proprietary code on top, does it?
The Darwin Streaming Server for one. There's also the Apple Lossless Codec. Plus, they're heavily involved in work on LLVM and have been for quite some time. Lastly, There's Grand Central Dispatch (libdispatch). Plus, WebKit is quite far from it's KHTML roots.
As for the Apple Lossless Codec, it open-sourced a failure. It would have been much better for everyone if Apple had just supported FLAC.
Re: Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler
#408Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's because the installer packages stink. WiX is a far better platform.
We know they stink, but it's what a lot of people have spent time working with. There is no straightforward migration path from vdproj to WiX, either. It's a case of re-writing all of your deployment code (which has already been tested/tweaked/hacked on for years) for no upfront benefit.
http://www.add-in-express.com/vdproj-wix-converter/index.php
Re: Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler
#409Earlier quoted context omitted.
Darwin is open source but is there anyone here who has actually used it or got a bootable usable machine from it? I mean, can you even run X on it successfully? I never could (didn't try very hard mind you). The release of Darwin isn't a massive thing I don't think.
There have been several independent distributions of Darwin. The current one is Pure Darwin. http://www.puredarwin.org
Re: Microsoft Open Sources C# Compiler
#410Earlier quoted context omitted.
Subtle difference: Apple and IBM have made use of free software such as FreeBSD, CUPS, Webkit, etc. Microsoft here is taking core technology and releasing it as free.
Important. Also, Oracle has bought/absorbed free software and slowly suffocated it (lookin at you, MySQL).