Microsoft subtracts C/C++ extension from VS Code forks
www.theregister.com
: Cursor, Codium makers lose access as add-on goes exclusive
  • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
    71·
    25 days ago

    holy shit! the thing I’ve been warning developers who promote and use this shitty tool has finally happened.

    shockedpikachu.jpeg

    if you write fossy software, don’t use products made by fossy enemies.

  • Realitätsverlust@lemmy.zipEnglish
    303·
    25 days ago

    A company that is known for doing shitty things does shitty things.

    Color me fucking surprised.

    Honestly, at this point, I have ZERO sympathy for people who are still actively using microsoft products and running into problems.

  • UpperBroccoli@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    8·
    26 days ago

    Maybe it’s just me, but I never got that thing to work right anyway - with VSC. It keeps running amok and using up all the CPU time doing stuff it should not be doing, trying to analyze every single file in my VM every single time it is started.

    So… good riddance.

  • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.comEnglish
    10·
    26 days ago

    Maybe we need a new movement (or revisit past ideas from the 70s) that focuses on ensuring the openness regarding freedoms of computing (😉) that combat proprietary SaaS offerings? idk.

    This is why OSS as an org needs a change IMO. Licenses like SSPLv1, where software can be supplied for free with options that allow a company to make money without risk of a cloud vendor snapping up their software (think Redis, MongoDB, etc) need a place at the table.

    • moonpiedumplings@programming.devEnglish
      62·
      25 days ago

      Licenses like SSPLv1

      The SSPL requires that all software used to deploy SSPL software is open sourced. If I deploy my software on Windows, do I have to provide the source code for Windows? What about the proprietary hardware drivers, or Intel Management Engine?

      The SSPL is not the next generation of licenses, it is effectively unusable. And both Redis and Mongo, dual licensed their software as the SSPL, and a proprietary license — effectively making their entire software proprietary.

      make money without risk of a cloud vendor snapping up their software (think Redis, MongoDB, etc) need a place at the table.

      Except Redis, and Mongo were making money. They had well valued, well earning SAAS offerings — it’s just that the offerings integrated into existing cloud vendors would be more popular (because vendor lock in). They just wanted more money, and were hoping that by going proprietary, they could force customers away from the cloud offers to themselves, and massively increase their revenue… They did not get that.

      Another thing is that it’s not “stealing” Mongo/Redis’ when cloud vendors offer SAAS’s of Mongo/Redis. Mongo/Redis, and their SAAS offerings, are only possible because the same cloud vendors put more money than Mongo/Redis make yearly into Linux and other software that powers the SAAS offerings of Mongo/Redis, like Kubernetes. Without that software, Mongo/Redis wouldn’t have a SAAS offering at all.

      I definitely think that it’s bad when a piece of software doesn’t get any funding it needs to develop, especially when it powers much more modern software, like XZ. But Mongo/Redis weren’t suffering from a lack of funding at all. They’re just mad they had to share their toys, and tried to take them away. But it didn’t even matter in the end.

  • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
    22·
    26 days ago

    They pulled the same thing with their widely used office format: base capabilities are standardised but most useful stuff is proprietary extension.