Microsoft ASP.NET vNext Is Open-Source, Runs On Linux

[nullone]

not enough

Well, just look at the numbers. They still dominate the desktop, but they're slipping - due to the disaster that is Windows 8, very little of their customer base is using the latest version of Windows; most of those migrating off the now-dead XP are going to 7. And while WP8 is more successful than it's predecessors, they're still struggling in mobile. It's a company in a completely different position from that which saw them dominating the industry for so long.

Really, when it comes to companies that worry me, they've slipped a long way down the list... behind Oracle, behind Google, behind Apple...

What you are talking about is the changed situation or external environment it is in.

That does not necessarily mean the person or company is changed.

A weakened tiger is still dangerous or "evil", unless its teeth are removed or been put into cage or sleep.

[jayrulez]

So nothing has changed.

What? Did you expect them to be promoting Linux?

[smitty3268]

This thread went downhill fast

Should have expected it, i guess.

[nullone]

Not FUD but baseless

Sure most companies have done plenty of harm, however Sun Microsystems set up an entire baseless FUD campaign around .NET involving Microsoft having patents on .NET and that it was some sort of virus they were going to turn around and use to sue linux developers, despite the fact that it was Sun Microsystems that had the track of suing people over Java, and not really doing any standardization until very late in Java's life, meanwhile Microsoft went all the way through ECMA, set up a community promise, and their .NET division has basically lead the rest of Microsoft in terms of being open source, and they've finally gotten to the point where they have opensourced the language compilers themselves, and have stated that if they see a need for it they'll open source their BCL and possibly even their JITer. Their only "crime" here is that they didn't make their implementation of .NET portable, and instead had Novell develop a version for linux under restrictive terms that they then significantly loosened. You're just being utterly paranoid here if you think that there's anything more sinister going on here than wanting to expand the usage of .NET




There's plenty of blind hatred, mostly coming from Sun Microsystems and Apple fanboys, but it's Sun Microsystems fanboys not people who just don't trust them that spread the anti-.NET FUD



Except they're nothing like a rapist at all, they're a company that (legitimately) sees GPLed and other copylefted software as a threat to their business because the GPL 'infects' the software license of the code ensuring that it's open source making it impractical to sell software as opposed to support contracts, when their entire business model revolves around software sales. They're perfectly fine with BSD-type licenses because they can share that common base without having to make their components that use them open source and thus impractical to sell. Now their position of having an effective monopoly meant that they could and have wielded their monopoly powers against this "threat". Which is exactly what your document say when you actually stop to understand them.

So what makes .NET different? Well it's not actually a product that they sell, Microsoft gives away their various compilers as freeware as well as a basic version of their IDE, while making sales on variants of the IDE with more features, as a result there is nothing for them to lose by open sourcing .NET however due to the current software patent mess they like everyone else is forced into building up a pool of patents surrounding .NET in order to defend itself against Sun Microsystems (now Oracle) in case they tried to sue over .NET. As ridiculous as it is, they gave a community promise and then put C# and VB as well as significant chunks of the .NET library under Apache (which means that even if they wanted to be aggressive on suing over .NET they can't). Also the decision to go this route came from Anders Hejlsberg, and one of the VPs and was okayed by Satya Nadella, not really anyone evil.



Linux and the GPL, yes. OSS in general, not that I'm aware, and the FUD against .NET stems from a completely different source: Sun Microsystems.



They're far from my favorite company, in fact I don't have a favorite company and think having one is stupid. What I take issue with is asinine idiotic FUD by various parties against superior technology, particularly when it's coming from Sun Microsystems who has about as much basis to talk as Adobe, which is to say none.

And when it comes to Apple and Sun Microsystems fanboys they do hate Microsoft simply because it's Microsoft and thus a superior competitor to their horrible products.



Do you have Java, MySQL (in any variation), Libre/Open Office, or Virtual Box installed? If so then you're directly running their software, also are you running a linux kernel? because oracle is the #8 contributor to linux.

I am wondering how you have gained a strong feeling against (old)SUN and a strong good taste for MS, which has impact on your vision in a way you can not realize.
When we say good ro bad, we usually say if athing is fit tfor user's benefit/environment/purpose.

Do you really believe MS is "a superior competitor to their horrible products" ( Apple and Sun )? I assume you are not related with MS and not live in days of SUN.

A good FUD is always mix some fact with something untestable.

Yours is simply emotional and baseless and a loud laugh on reader's intelligence.

[directhex]

Should have expected it, i guess.

The Phoronix community is incapable of rational discussion around anything relating to Microsoft. "Microsoft have put source on GitHub for their new stuff, with a GPLv3-compatible license (and patent grant) and official Linux and Mac support? FUCKING FASCISTS!!!!!!!!!!!!"

[nullone]

What? Did you expect them to be promoting Linux?

I am not sure on what ground you are standing when you asked such question.

Do not force you think in a world that has only two options: everything is not A must be B.

Azure supports Linux, shall you say they are "promoting Linux"?

People like me are lured by "runs on Linux", and hoped something new was happening or coming in some way that not against the nature desire of businessman to make (more) money or to make competitor weak(er).

Finding truth is hard, and recognizing the distractions on the way is even harder.

[jayrulez]

I am not sure on what ground you are standing when you asked such question.

Do not force you think in a world that has only two options: everything is not A must be B.

Azure supports Linux, shall you say they are "promoting Linux"?

People like me are lured by "runs on Linux", and hoped something new was happening or coming in some way that not against the nature desire of businessman to make (more) money or to make competitor weak(er).

Finding truth is hard, and recognizing the distractions on the way is even harder.

You replied to my post so you should have at least followed the "conversation" that I was in for context.

[Luke_Wolf]

I am wondering how you have gained a strong feeling against (old)SUN and a strong good taste for MS, which has impact on your vision in a way you can not realize.
When we say good ro bad, we usually say if athing is fit tfor user's benefit/environment/purpose.

Do you really believe MS is "a superior competitor to their horrible products" ( Apple and Sun )? I assume you are not related with MS and not live in days of SUN.

A good FUD is always mix some fact with something untestable.

Yours is simply emotional and baseless and a loud laugh on reader's intelligence.

You do realize that Sun Microsystem's software is and has always been crap along the level of Adobe, and they played their own set of highly unethical games to gain relevancy. The fact that they turned around and became the darling of the open source community made matters all the worse, because it meant that it's projects gained preferential treatment and were more likely to get contributors because they were more visible due to Sun's influence despite being vastly superior, or having a better design than the sun product. Calligra aka KOffice has had serious issues attracting developers because everyone backed Sun Microsystems on staroffice now OpenOffice/LibreOffice, which as a result meant that the one OSS office suite that could have stood up to MS Office and won was prevented from doing so.

Postgres is another perfect example, as a database it's vastly superior to MySQL however Sun made MySQL standard, which as a result got it more of the marketshare, and Postgres has had to slowly fight it's way up against this.

C# and .NET are superior to Java and the JVM yet Sun fanboys (Albeit mixed with Ballmer's incompetency) did their best to insure that .NET was made to feel unwelcome in the OSS community just as GTK tried to do to Qt. Which was easy because it's a technology developed by.... *gasp horror* Microsoft.

[Luke_Wolf]

Maybe you should read again that license term.



Not to mention other parts of software and license.

Maybe you should increase your reading comprehension. IANAL but all that says in a nutshell is that only the patents that cover the work are given under the patent grant by anyone contributing to it, such that nobody can take an unrelated patent and use this as justification as capability to use it without paying royalties.

[Luke_Wolf]

Thanks for shilling, mr. shill!

Ah yes see I'm the shill here because I don't bow before the alter of "Everything Microsoft is Evil!!!" and instead make pragmatic choices based upon which technology is best.

No, not like them, actually. Microsoft has much closer ties to NSA than any other tech company. Of course, that doesn't mean that others are innocent, but just because others also do bad things, doesn't absolve ms from their sins, and it doesn't mean that they are all equal. MS is in a close partnership with NSA, willingly and gladly co-operates with them, informs NSA of all known exploits before patches are published, implements backdoors for them... others - like google, apple, etc. - may also have problems wrt. privacy and NSA, but none of them go quite as far and have such a deep relationship with NSA as MS.

There's nothing you've listed there that Apple and Google don't do, and in fact Google probably has a far closer relationship to the NSA due to again Google Analytics which provides far more useful information than Microsoft ever could.

No, actually they don't. Because I happen to not be an idiot and do not sprinkle about my personal information on facespace and other social circlejerk services. I also take care of my privacy online and don't use any of my online accounts on my cellphone.

You realize whether you're on social media or not doesn't stop the fact that they can and do use the video camera and microphone to record, the GPS to track location and create profiles and that any call you take or any text you send is associated with that profile, and any conversation that you have with someone who has a cellphone in the area is tracking you and listening to you. All social media does is give them *more* information

Ghostery, Noscript, Adblock. Bam - problem solved. Next!

You're forgetting that you need Tor and to not use Google, Bing, or Ask as your search engine, instead use something like DuckDuckGo, and email has to be done using a provider that is not your ISP or one of the more popular free providers (Google, Microsoft, Yahoo)

There are no drones in Finland and if I see one I'll shoot it down.

With what exactly? Reaper drones fly at an altitude of 50,000 feet (~9 1/2 miles or ~ 15 km) in the real world unlike CoD you're not even going to see them let alone have anything that can touch them.

Well, that was quite a nice little apologia there. Hey, look everyone, we're already completely fucked by the government (which is in large part resulting from the fact that your government in USA has been mostly taken over by corporatism and crony capitalism) so it doesn't matter if we get fucked by corporations too! Who cares if microsoft invades our privacy, we can't do anything about it so we might as well just bend over!

Actually the whole invasion of privacy has nothing to do with the corporations it has everything to do with a rogue government grabbing whatever power it can to enforce a police state, starting in the 1950s, and the populace just bending over and letting itself be fucked. The problem is the revolution required to fix this problem is impossible due to the current level of military establishment which is only becoming worse. It was bad enough when it was just tanks and helicopters, now they have untouchable drones which can take out targets and doesn't even need to have military operators.

You're commiting so many logical fallacies I can't even begin to count them.

Firstly: Just because we can't guarantee perfect privacy, just because we can't protect our civil rights perfectly, doesn't mean that we should just throw all of them away and not care about any of them. There are more levels and grades of privacy between "100% perfect" and "none". When you use Microsoft Windows, you're vulnerable to all the backdoors, all the exploits that microsoft willingly exposes to NSA. If you don't use windows, no, you may not get perfect privacy either - but you'll get a hell of a lot more than you get with it.

The point is at this point when it comes to the NSA and friends you have no privacy, the screen of 1984 is everywhere and the screen is always watching. You can only protect yourself against individuals and businesses. At best you can make the NSA's job a little bit more difficult. Also you're just as vulnerable if you use Apple products or if you use Android.

Secondly: just because other corporations also make bad things, doesn't mean we should treat all corporations the same. Some do less bad things than others, and we can put them in order of how harmful, dangerous and unethical their practices are. Guess where microsoft stands in this ranking?

About the middle of the pack in reality, Apple has done significantly worse like creating the whole concept of software patents in the first place. Intel is also significantly worse, Comcast is worse and so on.

Thirdly: Microsoft is one of the most unethical, despicable, harmful organizations ever to exist and should be condemned and judged for crimes against humanity. They have done so much harm to mankind by their unethical, borderline criminal practices, lobbying, slander, FUD, threats, extortion, patent/copyright trolling, et cetera, that the list is seriously too long to write down here. The sooner we get rid of that ugly stain in the history of the world, the better. And no, I don't care if you think they have "pretty nice trackballs" or whatever. I really don't. If you value temporary comfort more than your civil rights, privacy, openness, freedom, transparency, that's your problem and something you have to work out by yourself. But don't give me those bullshit justifications that are being spread by ms astroturfers and shills and PR teams. They've been rebunked countless times already and will continue to be rebunked everywhere

Actually if we're just considering the tech field here that title belongs to Apple for the creation of software patents. Apple has done a lot of other shitty things too (including everything you're saying Microsoft has done), but the existence of software patents as a thing has done more harm to the tech industry as a whole than any other factor combined.