[Someone1234]

> To echo what others said...

Your post doesn't do that. Most other posts name other reasons (potentially legitimate ones), your "it is expensive" justification is inaccurate and doesn't echo most posts here.

> Microsoft charged money in multiple areas of the stack: the compiler (VS) cost money, the database (MS SQL Server) cost money, and the operating system (Windows licenses) cost money.

The C# compiler is free and OSS. You don't need Visual Studio to use it. In fact many use it with VSCode, VIM, or Notepad++ for $0. You can also pay less money and use Jetbrains' Rider, or 5x commercial users can use Visual Studio Community Edition if you want a fancy IDE.

MS Sql is non-free. But not at all part of .Net Framework. So it is off-topic. You can use MySQL, PostgreSql, SQLite, most Cloud database solutions (Azure, AWS, Google Cloud), or whatever you want. Drivers are readily available.

You also don't need Windows. .Net Core is available for Linux and MacOS. So if C#/.Net Core + VIM + Linux + MySql is your thing? You can. For $0. Today.

This type of misinformation is why people don't look to .Net Core though unfortunately.

[jasode]

>Your post doesn't do that.

So in the good spirit of acknowledging others who posted similar comments before me, I get nitpicked?!?

- hours before me... look for word "money": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20256086

- hour before me... look for word "budget":: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20256682

- 9 minutes before me... look for word "expensive": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20256765

- 5 minutes before me... look for word "costs": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20256788

>For $0. Today.

Yes I also mentioned that tools are free today. My comment was about how the past has a ripple effect on culture of startups avoiding the Microsoft tech stack. This is still in effect today. I would guess than 90+% of YC startups in 2019 are still not choosing the Microsoft stack. It doesn't matter to those founders that .NET Core and VSCode are free today.

[world32]

You are clearly very bitter about this.

> The C# compiler is free and OSS.

Has this always been the case?

> .Net Core is available for Linux and MacOS.

A quick wikipedia search shows that .Net core was first released in June 2016, that only supports the view that microsoft has been very late to the game when it comes to open source languages and frameworks.

The original comment that you disagreed with says "Yes, MS later radically changed strategy by making their tools open source and more compatible on Linux.", but despite your hostility nothing in your post actually disagrees with that comment does it?

[Someone1234]

> You are clearly very bitter about this.

Being snarky and name calling against site guidelines. It is the first line:

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> Has this always been the case?

Has this always been the case with Java? With C? With C++? It has been open standard since 2001 and the current compiler open source since 2014. So five or more years. Ten or more with Mono (part of .Net Core today).

> A quick wikipedia search shows that .Net core was first released in June 2016, that only supports the view that microsoft has been very late to the game when it comes to open source languages and frameworks.

.Net Core isn't the first version to be open sourced nor free.

[world32]

> Being snarky and name calling against site guidelines.

Ha, OK.

> Has this always been the case with Java? With C? With C++?

Its funny to see all the logical fallacies being used to try and counter a perfectly valid argument! What does this have to do with Java, C or C++? But since you asked, there were always open source compilers for C and C++ (GCC and G++ for example). Java - I don't know, I suspect not, but is Java popular with startups anyway? Why mention it?

> It has been open standard since 2001 and the current compiler open source since 2014.

Not sure exactly what Open standard entails?

Essentially, the original argument said that the software ecosystem for .NET has mostly been non-free and non-opensource until very recently (2014 - 2016 as you mentioned), which has meant that for at least a decade startups have avoided it in favour of open source frameworks, so even though it is NOW open source, the damage has already been done. None of these counter-examples actually contradict that original statement. By 2016 open source frameworks like Django, Rails, Symfony had been around for more than a decade and were no longer the "shiny new toy" but generally accepted as mature, stable frameworks on which to build applications. So I think its fair to say that Microsoft's approach to open source has been too little and far far too late.

[Barrin92]

> You can. For $0. Today.

with the focus on today. A significant amount of infrastructure you just named is merely a few years old, and understandably hasn't made it into most companies.