|
|
|
|
|
|
by golf1052
1382 days ago
|
|
|
I don't really understand this post. I'm a supporter of open source and free software and I can also understand wanting to avoid vendor lock-in. However I don't understand how this is Microsoft's fault for building closed source tooling. I'm upset with Microsoft's hypocritical stance on .NET and C# being open source without all tooling being open source as well but when it comes to useful tooling like Codespaces, Pylance, or the Java debugger in VSCode I don't see why Microsoft should be blamed them being closed source. Microsoft came into the Java and Python space and made tooling that is being accepted by developers. The author does touch on why companies like Microsoft are able to succeed against open source software. It's because they have the money to pay their own developers to make good software. Disclaimer: I work at Microsoft but not under DevDiv or Azure. |
|
|
Android Open Source Project = VS Code (MIT codebase(
Android at Samsung and dozens other = VS Code with Microsoft EULA
Enforced Play Store in vendor phones = VS Code Extension Market Place (not accessible to any other competition)
Google offering dominant services = Microsoft Language Packages (both proprietary => user lock in)
Google abusing it (eg by marketing, subscriptions, ...) = Microsoft abusing it
So what is explained in that article is how you run a monopoly on an open source project. Julia and the DevDiv is doing that. That is understandable (she has to make money to get her bonus) but not good for the rest of us.
Disclaimer: .NET fanboy