New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

5.4 Microsoft #90

Open
mj1856 opened this Issue Jun 16, 2015 · 5 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
6 participants
@mj1856
Copy link

mj1856 commented Jun 16, 2015

Section 5.4 seems a bit unfair. It implies that Microsoft doesn't like virtual machines, and doesn't like anything that doesn't run on Windows. Both could be further from the truth.

I could go on all day. The sentiment expressed in section 5.4 is outdated and should be revised or removed.

Thanks.

Disclaimer - I work for Microsoft, but these are my own opinions, not any official company statement.

@tophtucker tophtucker added the text label Jun 19, 2015

@markvincze

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

markvincze commented Jun 19, 2015

I couldn't agree more.
I thoroughly enjoyed this article, I think it's absolutely great. The only thing I couldn't understand was the Microsoft-hate, it just feels childish.
(I don't work for Microsoft, but spent most of my career in the MS-ecosystem.)

@putztzu

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

putztzu commented Jun 26, 2015

I interpreted this section differently.

First, the "virtual machine" referenced isn't virtual machine technology like Hyper-V locally or on Azure or anything like that, the reference is described in the previous section as the JVM/JRE, or Java Runtime Environment at times running as its own virtualized environment.

Read in that context, the opinion in this section about Microsoft is largely true long ago when MS decided to create the CLR as the head to head competitor to Java... a different approach to attaining the same objectives which is that a common app codebase could be used to create apps on numerous target platforms (Won't go into the technical details how the JVM/JRE and the CLR are different here)

Readers should understand that Paul's perspectives are clearly developed with a non-Microsoft, pro-Java history... which has to be OK because there's nothing wrong with that. It's what he knows which is representative of many, many others.

@ftrain

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

ftrain commented Jun 26, 2015

FWIW, @putztzu accurately described my intent. To add some color to this issue, Bill Gates, who currently works as a technology advisor at Microsoft, apparently liked the piece and felt that it "skillfully captures how code runs our lives." https://twitter.com/BillGates/status/613752323152719872

@spivonious

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

spivonious commented Jul 28, 2015

Regardless of intent, the section doesn't add anything to the piece and should be removed. Also get rid of the dig at C# devs. Microsoft hasn't been the "Evil Empire" since the 90s.

@mj1856

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

mj1856 commented Jul 28, 2015

@putztzu - The exact line is:

You can’t have people choosing to run stuff on a virtual machine when they should be running it on Windows machines, as God and Bill Gates intended.

While the previous paragraph did talk about Java, this statement is blurring the line. It doesn't even make sense within context, as the JVM runs just fine on Windows.

The rest of it is clearly about Java, but is just inflammatory. Where is this coming from?

Of course if you are Microsoft, this is intolerable. You can’t have some other company creeping into your banks and enterprises with this dumb language.

Really the whole first paragraph should be removed. The second one is just fine by itself.

mj1856 added a commit to mj1856/whatiscode that referenced this issue Jul 28, 2015

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment