Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Windows 10 October 2018 Update, Windows Server 2019 Now Available

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Kushan
    replied
    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    why should i do that when i can just run fedora without windows?
    If you don't want to or need to run windows, then why do you care?

    The point is that you used to have less of a choice whereas now you can run whatever OS you want for most tasks.

    I can run Linux and it has enough support to run the occasional windows app if I need. I can also run Windows and it has enoguh support to run the occasional Linux app, it's the best of both worlds and the choice is now largely with the user.

    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    i don't remember details, but screen output was garbled
    Okay so it's basically the software equivalent to a strawman.

    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    my point is that it's one-line change, for thing broken for decades
    And? Ignoring the fact that it was almost certainly not a one-line change (or it'd break existing compatibility), what does it matter?

    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    are you lying intentionally or you just believe in ms lies? only tiny part of .net is now open source
    The .net compiler is completely open source. The core libraries are open source. The core CLR is open source. The CLI is open source. The SDK is open source. All development on .net core is done in the open on github, it's all open source, it's all cross platform. Go take a look at the dotnet foundation on github. The Dotnet foundation is independent, backed by Microsoft but also backed by RedHat and Google (among others). What more do you want?

    The .net framework is still a windows-specific and largely closed source, but it's basically in maintenance mode and all of the functionality within it that you care about is now part of .net core. The bits left over are Windows-specific, like Winforms, registry and that gubbins - and that still works on .net core, with the next release of .net core to allow even that functionality to run on it. There's basically no reason to use .net framework these days and even Microsoft says this.

    For new desktop applications, we’ll guide everyone to start with .NET Core 3.
    All of the effort and development is done on .net core and it all adheres to a standard that any implementation (including the framework) can adhere to, including but not limited to Mono and Tizen. You can literally create your own implementation and all the dotnet core libs and tools will just work with it. It's all open source. It's all cross platform. It's all free and it's all licensed liberally.

    .NET Core repos typically use either the MIT or Apache 2 licenses for code. Some projects license documentation and other forms of content under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.
    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    no, that's the other way around. containers are needed to run more software on windows, not to run ms software on other platforms
    The point is that you don't have to run that software on windows. You can pick it up and take it elsewhere. That's the opposite of vendor lock-in.

    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    lol why you are touting vs code but ignoring vs itself? nobody uses editors for developing real software.
    VS Code is far more than just an "editor", it has full support for debugging, built-in git integration and all sorts. Give it a try, it's genuinely far leaner and easier to use for even "real" software than "full" VS.

    However you're right, full-fat VS is still Windows only. Well, there's VS For Mac but let's ignore that. We're talking about vendor lock-in here. You don't have to use VS, as stated you can use VS code to do all your .net development if you want. In fact, you don't even need VS Code - the dotnet CLI works cross platform and is basically all you need - use whatever editor or IDE you fancy. Again - no vendor lock in.

    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    it can't replace ms office, otherwise ms would discontinue msoffice
    yes, they have monopoly only on desktop, so they have no choice but support most used operating system(linux) on azure, otherwise they wouldn't have customers. but on desktop they have monopoly and that is because of vendor lock-in and msoffice is large part of that. you can have msoffice on android where ms lost competition, but you can't have it on desktop linux where ms still abuses its monopoly
    Maybe you're right, but at least office is available on Mac, Android and iOS. Office will run on Linux using the usual tools, so what's stopping people from ditching Windows there? It's not as simple as "abusing" a monopoly, that monopoly has been dwindling for years thanks to the rise in smartphones and tablets - where Microsoft has basically zero market. You're right, they had to support those platforms since they had no choice but nobody's suggesting otherwise. The point is that this adage of vendor-lock-in is at best outdated.

    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    lol not. i developed windows software but i never used any app from your list. i used visual studio, that is how you develop software on windows. and
    Yeah sure, 10 years ago maybe but times have changed. Microsoft isn't stuck in the past, so why are you?

    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    btw sql server is server app where ms again does not have monopoly, so has nothing to lose.
    So? It's still not vendor lock-in. What's the issue here?

    At the end of the day, you can develop .net applications, extremely performant, productive, scalable and cross-platform apps using any OS and IDE you want, using any database you want - including SQL Server, but also MySQL/Maria, SQLLite, etc. and host it wherever you want.

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by Weasel View Post
    (NOT talking about games, let's leave those off here, just normal applications)
    it's unfair to not talk about one of most cited reasons for staying on windows

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by Weasel View Post
    No, you don't need Windows for that, unless they don't run well in Wine.
    which is most of the time

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by Kushan View Post
    WSL not good enough? Why not just spin up Ubuntu in a VM?
    why should i do that when i can just run fedora without windows?
    Originally posted by Kushan View Post
    "unusable" how?
    i don't remember details, but screen output was garbled
    Originally posted by Kushan View Post
    And? What's your point? It was a really minor annoyance that was easily dealt with by installing another text editor, yet they still went and fixed it. 20 years too late sure, but the point is that Microsoft from 20 years ago is a different beast.
    my point is that it's one-line change, for thing broken for decades
    Originally posted by Kushan View Post
    Okay there's two points here really. You don't want vendor lock-in? That's cool, that's why .net is now fully open source
    are you lying intentionally or you just believe in ms lies? only tiny part of .net is now open source
    Originally posted by Kushan View Post
    , that's why Windows has built-in support for containers,
    no, that's the other way around. containers are needed to run more software on windows, not to run ms software on other platforms
    Originally posted by Kushan View Post
    that's why VS Code and SQL Data Studio are fully cross platform. VS Code is genuinely one of the best code editors out there and it's open-source and cross platform,
    lol why you are touting vs code but ignoring vs itself? nobody uses editors for developing real software.
    Originally posted by Kushan View Post
    but hey because you don't have Office on Linux, that's a deal breaker? Fine, use Office Online on whatever browser you want.
    it can't replace ms office, otherwise ms would discontinue msoffice
    Originally posted by Kushan View Post
    The point is if you want, you can write whatever software you want for whatever platform you want on whatever platform you want. Don't want to run Windows? Great! Don't. You don't have to. Everything that matters these days works on any platform that matters. They've even invested heavily into Kubernetes, both in Windows and Azure. You can write a containerised app, chuck it on Azure then move it over to GCloud or AWS whenever you want and Microsoft is doing nothing to stop you.
    yes, they have monopoly only on desktop, so they have no choice but support most used operating system(linux) on azure, otherwise they wouldn't have customers. but on desktop they have monopoly and that is because of vendor lock-in and msoffice is large part of that. you can have msoffice on android where ms lost competition, but you can't have it on desktop linux where ms still abuses its monopoly
    Originally posted by Kushan View Post
    As I mentioned above, you have VS Code, SQL Data Studio, etc. SQL Server now runs on Linux, asp.net runs on Linux, Microsoft's cloud devops platform allows you to run agents on Linux, Azure has 1st part support for Linux. What more do you want? Is it literally just office?
    lol not. i developed windows software but i never used any app from your list. i used visual studio, that is how you develop software on windows. and btw sql server is server app where ms again does not have monopoly, so has nothing to lose.
    Last edited by pal666; 04 October 2018, 07:59 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    That's not what "blue light" means in their narrative. Color management changes the color of the pixels, but the glasses are for the LCD backpanel's "harmful light" that shines through.

    It's bs I know, but that's what they believe.
    yes, it is bs. glasses are blocking certain colors i.e. are changing the color of the pixels. you can do same thing in software for free

    Leave a comment:


  • Weasel
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    The amount of applications that run well in Wine is not comparable to thje ones that run well in the $windows_version the application was released on.
    You'd be surprised how many work just fine and it improves over time. Sure there's many which don't work, but personally like 9 out of 10 work for me. My needs can't be that unique...

    That said, when people complain about Wine it's usually something like Office or Photoshop (though even Photoshop "old versions", which was the point, work fine btw) or REALLY old apps (which frankly some work much better on Wine than on newer Windows versions due to how old they are and using undocumented hacks). Those applications may be used by a large amount of people, but they are still only a couple of applications. Office is just a suite of apps, it's not "the majority" but rather a tiny minority in the entire app ecosystem.

    (NOT talking about games, let's leave those off here, just normal applications)

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by Weasel View Post
    No, you don't need Windows for that, unless they don't run well in Wine.
    The amount of applications that run well in Wine is not comparable to thje ones that run well in the $windows_version the application was released on.

    Leave a comment:


  • Weasel
    replied
    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    i'm not sure what are you smoking. the only reason to use windows is to run old proprietary wintel apps. which can't be run on arm64, so windows on arm64 will be as successful as windows on arm rt ( WART )
    No, you don't need Windows for that, unless they don't run well in Wine.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by Danielsan View Post
    Hence buying GitHub was another step to build up a new facade as well as taking somehow control (at least indirectly) of many open source projects.
    I still don't see how that would work to build a new facade outside of their propaganda machine.

    Also no they have exactly 0 control over the opensource projects on github, just like they have 0 control over stuff in Azure.

    Leave a comment:


  • Danielsan
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post

    I remember his post history and I'm of a different opinion, but let's leave it as that.

    [...]

    You said MS became a opensource company just by virtue of buying Github, so it's you who should back it up.
    Actually I was bitterly ironic, however it is not me but all the specialized press threats M$ like it was Red Hat or Novell, like it was an open source advocate. And if you ask to any reporter they repeat always the same: this is not new but this is started while ago...
    Hence buying GitHub was another step to build up a new facade as well as taking somehow control (at least indirectly) of many open source projects.

    But eventually it is still the same M$, a reliable gate of malwares:

    https://appuals.com/phishing-attack-...rom-microsoft/

    With a sincerely passion for the patent trolling:

    http://techrights.org/2018/10/04/pat...oft-enforcers/


    Last edited by Danielsan; 04 October 2018, 10:34 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X