I would love to travel back in time to, say, 10 years ago, and show a print of this blog post to people.
Explaining containers would be the easy part.
Explaining Microsoft, the open source company, on the other hand...
Explaining containers would be the easy part.
Explaining Microsoft, the open source company, on the other hand...
I'm curious what makes you think they're an open source company. As far as I know, they have only open-sourced things that will attract developers back into their ecosystem. And only out of desperation that developers were leaving in droves. They only open-source things that benefit them. Have they ever open-sourced anything that benefited others before themselves?
They've largely open-sourced what could be considered common place pieces with lots of competition, while keeping some secret sauce, and advancing their rental models (azure, o365, etc).
Seriously, I’m not saying they’re paragons, but who the heck is? (Profitable companies only, please.)
What is definitely the case, however, is that 10/20 years ago Microsoft would not even be writing that article, they’d have their own competitor, with weird lock-ins and missing features that was tightly integrated with some GUI panel in Visual Studio.
Can’t properly quantify (on mobile atm) but I’d venture to say they release as much or more than, say, Amazon
Or just open sources theirs, but yeah I generally agree.
> and Microsoft uses Rust
Hold on. That'd be cool and all but they've already released 2-3 open source languages. Pretending that the use of the language de jour would be anywhere near the list of things that redeem MS feels shortsighted.