Github about to be Miscrosofted?

[jagdtigger]

1 minute ago, Delicieuxz said:

I also feel it is disgraceful, though my thoughts aren't in Hungarian.

 

I also edited my above post with more of my thoughts.

OFC not , sometimes our language is a blessing and sometimes its a curse. Especially when there is no way to translate our thoughts in a meaningful manner to other languages.

[Mira Yurizaki]

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

If someone like Canonical could get their asses in gear and put out something that could truly rival Windows and macOS, that would be awesome.

 

Linux's best feature is also it's worst: Unlimited customization, forks, distros, versions.

 

Android has the same problem with the massive fragmentation between different versions. Google is only just starting to focus on their own first party devices that keep a "vanilla" version that has long term support.

The problem of inertia in user experience still remains. You can say how user friendly and whatnot Ubuntu is, but it's never going to be like Windows nor macOS. Even the macOS lookalike distros like elementary and deepin aren't going to be anything more than a curiosity because they lack Apple's massive ecosystem. The only shot Linux has at being widely used by consumers is for Google to make something around the Android/Chrome ecosystem. But alas, it's not going to be the "Linux experience," whatever that means.

 

1 hour ago, jagdtigger said:

That aint gonna happen IMO.... MS is just too fond of closed source proprietary solutions.

Again, if they make a Linux distro and "taint" it with a lot of proprietary software, the FOSS community is going to shout very loudly how stupid it is to the point where it's going to reach major publications. And it's very likely to get on everyone's radar because a big name is doing it.

 

Also Microsoft's been opening up a lot lately. I mean, explain this: https://github.com/Microsoft

 

EDIT: Also poking around at some of their project's license files, I've found three that were using a permissive license like MIT or Apache, not something Microsoft came up with. So I wouldn't be surprised to find many more with a permissive license like MIT, Apache, or BSD.

[Linus_torvalds]

Linus Torvalds is GOD! He created Git and Linux. Two things i love in computers most. Even if gihub gets destroyed by microshit i do not care. I'll just move to bitbucket.

[jagdtigger]

8 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Also Microsoft's been opening up a lot lately. I mean, explain this: https://github.com/Microsoft

That is what we call here in Hungary "Honey string", in other words bait to mislead the mass populous who cant(or dont want to)see through it. Sorry but that company has shown their true colors with win10, and i have 0 reason to trust in them, let alone making assumptions that they do not have ulterior motives for doing this.

[AlTech]

If Microsoft bought GitHub, I'd switch to GitLab in an instant. Both Microsoft and Google are already too large and control too much.

 

Besides, Microsoft's own attempt to compete with GitHub failed (See: Codeplex).

[mr moose]

7 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Not just github, the whole linux subsystem in win10 and the rest of linux stuff they done lately.... They arent supporting linux and open source ATM because they are nice, but because they are scheming something. Its just a hunch based on the artificial limitations in UWP(only MS libraries[DX, edge, etc] allowed) and their past track record...

put the paranoia away.

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

That is what we call here in Hungary "Honey string", in other words bait to mislead the mass populous who cant(or dont want to)see through it. Sorry but that company has shown their true colors with win10, and i have 0 reason to trust in them, let alone making assumptions that they do not have ulterior motives for doing this.

You see   everything as evidence MS are evil. even when it is more logical grounds for an alternate postulation.

2 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

 

Besides, Microsoft's own attempt to compete with GitHub failed (See: Codeplex).

Just another reason why they are interested in getting closer to github.   This is what MS does, their phones where failing so they bought nokia (didn't really work but it's what they did).  messenger was going no where so they bought skype, They needed a larger user base for their accounts network so they bought hotmail/linkedin.

 

In fact if we look at their acquisition history they have been buying companies to augment their own products or prop up their short falls since 1987.

[Mira Yurizaki]

4 hours ago, mr moose said:

In fact if we look at their acquisition history they have been buying companies to augment their own products or prop up their short falls since 1987.

That's pretty much Silicon Valley's business model in a nutshell. Go find a startup that's doing well, buy them outright, integrate it into your product line.

 

I mean heck, the earliest example I can think of is Commodore buying MOS Technologies and ran off with the 6502 architecture after TI screwed Commodore over.

Edited June 3, 2018 by M.Yurizaki

[Syntaxvgm]

alright let's get to work. 

[jagdtigger]

6 hours ago, mr moose said:

put the paranoia away.

Judging a company based on its actions in the past is a far from paranoia...

[mr moose]

5 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Judging a company based on its actions in the past is a far from paranoia...

I have yet to see a company that hasn't done something dodgy or shitty.  It must be hard every time you have to buy something knowing that you are supporting some sort of unethical corporation that's only intention is to ruin your life.

 

Also why do you put the rolls eyes emoticon at the end of all your posts?  I'm not sure it means what you think it does.

[Syntaxvgm]

7 hours ago, mr moose said:

put the paranoia away.

lol ok 

http://www.catb.org/esr/halloween/

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samizdat%3a_And_Other_Issues_Regarding_the_'Source'_of_Open_Source_Code

 

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/05/28/100033867/

https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-profits-from-linux-patent-fud/

 

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2007/05/microsoft-235-patent-specific-patent-infringements-in-linux/

 

http://techrights.org/2010/10/14/msft-scorpion-and-the-tortoise/

http://techrights.org/2016/03/10/charm-offensives-distract/
^That 2016 one's great, covers MS literally taking existing things from Linux distros and patenting them in a fraudulent and abusive manner. 

 

Oh, I remember reading this one janurary of this year. 

http://techrights.org/2018/01/16/microsoft-uses-patent-trolls/

 

 

Quote

"Linux is a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches,"   Steve Ballmer , June 1, 2001.

 

So yea I can probably just keep going and going really, but I tried to give a spread over the years. 

I would love to make a nice list of micrsoft patent trolling history, not just MS but all proxies as well. It's shit like this 

https://patents.google.com/patent/US5758352?oq=5%2c758%2c352

that's not even that bad in terms of what they get away with, I just like this one becuase literally Linus Torvalds himself helped invalidate it legally because, like normal, they took existing shit and patented it to attempt to troll competitors (in this case, Motorola) and foss solutions out of existence. 

[jagdtigger]

22 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I have yet to see a company that hasn't done something dodgy or shitty.

Problem is MS have way too many dark spots in their past... (Same reason why i love LOS on my  phone.)

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Syntaxvgm said:

lol ok 

http://www.catb.org/esr/halloween/

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samizdat%3a_And_Other_Issues_Regarding_the_'Source'_of_Open_Source_Code

 

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/05/28/100033867/

https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-profits-from-linux-patent-fud/

 

http://techrights.org/2010/10/14/msft-scorpion-and-the-tortoise/

http://techrights.org/2016/03/10/charm-offensives-distract/
^That 2016 one's great, covers MS literally taking existing things from Linux distros and patenting them in a fraudulent and abusive manner. 

 

Oh, I remember reading this one janurary of this year. 

http://techrights.org/2018/01/16/microsoft-uses-patent-trolls/

 

 

 

So yea I can probably just keep going and going really, but I tried to give a spread over the years. 

I would love to make a nice list of micrsoft patent trolling history, not just MS but all proxies as well. It's shit like this 

https://patents.google.com/patent/US5758352?oq=5%2c758%2c352

that's not even that bad in terms of what they get away with, I just like this one becuase literally Linus Torvalds himself helped invalidate it legally. 

Not sure what you are trying to communicate here, but I can say that most of what you posted there is either personal opinion or something that I have already posted/talked about.

[Syntaxvgm]

3 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Not sure what you are trying to communicate here, but I can say that most of what you posted there is either personal opinion or something that I have already posted/talked about.

you could not have read any of that in that time. It's literally MS attacking foss, and some of it is this year. They are currently, right now, talking about their commitment to open source out of one corner of their mouth and from the other trying to extort people behind foss solutions it with fraudulent patents. 

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Syntaxvgm said:

you could not have read any of that in that time. It's literally MS attacking foss, and some of it is this year. 

I have read quit a bit of this stuff before.   I did not say MS have never attacked FOSS or Linux before.  I said FOSS and Linux are not under any threat from MS.  MS simply cannot kill it.  There is no way short of dictatorial government intervention that Linux or FOSS will die at the hands of any private company.    You can point to many examples of MS being cunts toward any business or product you want, but that is not going to change this. I linked to quite a few articles before that explained why FOSS is the way of the future.  Any company wanting to sure up it's relevance over the next decade is going to have to square itself up with that.

[Syntaxvgm]

6 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I have read quit a bit of this stuff before.   I did not say MS have never attacked FOSS or Linux before.  I said FOSS and Linux are not under any threat from MS.  MS simply cannot kill it.  There is no way short of dictatorial government intervention that Linux or FOSS will die at the hands of any private company.    You can point to many examples of MS being cunts toward any business or product you want, but that is not going to change this. I linked to quite a few articles before that explained why FOSS is the way of the future.  Any company wanting to sure up it's relevance over the next decade is going to have to square itself up with that.

I edited, sorry 

Quote

 They are currently, right now, talking about their commitment to open source out of one corner of their mouth and from the other trying to extort people behind foss solutions it with fraudulent patents. 

How can anyone take this at face value when they continue to fight open source through patent trolling/extortion? 

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, Syntaxvgm said:

I edited, sorry 

How can anyone take this at face value when they continue to do fight open source though patent trolling/extortion? 

Because we actually know very little about the details of most of those patent deals.  I find it a little hard to believe that companies as big as amazon are blindly paying patent licenses to MS for software they should know is free or currently under GPL.  Many of these patents stem back to MS purchase of Novell and while some of that i believe was under gpl and has to remain under GPL, that does not mean there was other stuff that doesn't. 

 

To put all this into perspective of my comments above,  MS have been doing this for quite sometime which indicates they are interested in getting in on the cash that linux produces (along with other FOSS), rather than trying to stamp it out as a threat.  I think MS worked out a while back that competition can increase your revenue stream if you engage with it beyond an enemy. There is a reason they put office on ipad, bought shares in apple and wrote a lot of the software for mac.    Apple is not going anywhere anytime soon and are not going to get caught out with EEE shenanigans from MS.  The entire FOSS community like wise will not fall victim to it either.

[Sniperfox47]

19 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

All I'm saying here is that there's been enough time for the FOSS community to start creating an alternative kernel to Linux. Google did and they're now really making bank on it but it doesn't requires a big name company to do so for big capital interest, or rather, a group of them should see it's in their own best interest to invest on it collectively and not be locked down by a bigger fish because if it's not Microsoft it will be Google or another rich player like Amazon, Facebook, etc. Who can and will provide alternatives if (or rather, when) Torvalds is no longer around.

What kernel are you talking about from Google that they're "making bank" from? I haven't really heard anything on the matter.

 

If you're talking tinykernel I don't believe it was made while Martin Kelly worked for them, and if you're talking Zircon/Magenta it's not being rolled out in any products yet afaik.

[Misanthrope]

1 hour ago, Sniperfox47 said:

What kernel are you talking about from Google that they're "making bank" from? I haven't really heard anything on the matter.

 

If you're talking tinykernel I don't believe it was made while Martin Kelly worked for them, and if you're talking Zircon/Magenta it's not being rolled out in any products yet afaik.

Android modified the Linux Kernel but it was initially based on it.

[mr moose]

9 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Android modified the Linux Kernel but it was initially based on it.

Chrome OS too yes?

[Misanthrope]

3 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Chrome OS too yes?

I believe so, just not really that lucrative vs Android of course.

[TechyBen]

22 hours ago, Radium_Angel said:

I'd be concerned if it didn't come from the Register, who are notoriously unreliable.

Oh, I agree. But as others have said, this is not out of the blue. There have been talks previously.

[LAwLz]

I wonder why. Forcefully inject data collection into open source projects maybe?

And before someone calls me paranoid for suggesting that, please remember that Microsoft deserves NO BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT WHATSOEVER.

They have already been caught injecting data collection into projects compiled with Visual Studio, so I wouldn't put it past them.

 

I legitimately think it is insane that people still don't assume the worst when it comes to Microsoft, after they have several times been found guilty of doing anti-competitive and sleazy things to harm not just their competitors but also their consumers.

Can someone from the group I like to call the "Microsoft Defense Force" (you know who you are) please explain to me how you can still trust Microsoft?

[GoodBytes]

40 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I wonder why. Forcefully inject data collection into open source projects maybe?

And before someone calls me paranoid for suggesting that, please remember that Microsoft deserves NO BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT WHATSOEVER.

They have already been caught injecting data collection into projects compiled with Visual Studio, so I wouldn't put it past them.

Why would Microsoft even remotely cares about other people code? As mentioned by Microsoft Visual Studio team, it is to measure performance.

 

In the post you mentioned:

Quote

our desire was to build a framework that will help investigate performance problems and improve the quality of our optimizer should we get any reports of slowdowns or endemic perf problems in the field.

We apologize for raising the suspicion levels even further by not including the CRT source, this was just an oversight on our part. Despite that, some of you already investigated how this mechanism works in nice detail. As you have already called out, what the code does is trigger an ETW event which, when it’s turned on, will emit timestamps and module loads events. The event data can only be interpreted if a customer gives us symbol information (i.e. PDBs) so this data is only applicable to customers that are actively seeking help from us and are willing to share these PDBs as part of their investigation.

And, of course you need the PDB files (meaning you need to hit Debug mode, compile, and then send them with the executable). It will take more time for Microsoft to setup a team and figure out someones code through memory analysis without the PDB files  to steal code, than to design the project themselves.