[HN Gopher] The Day AppGet Died (2020)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Day AppGet Died (2020)
        
       Author : q2loyp
       Score  : 217 points
       Date   : 2022-02-18 10:42 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (keivan.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (keivan.io)
        
       | fnord77 wrote:
       | was there some way to have prevented or mitigated this?
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | marginalia_nu wrote:
         | Don't know about the cloning of his product, but in terms of
         | negotiation: Don't let yourself get strung along just because
         | someone waves something you want in front of your face.
         | 
         | It's absolutely vital in any negotiation that you set
         | boundaries and that you are are willing to walk away if those
         | boundaries aren't respected. Especially if you really want what
         | they are offering.
         | 
         | In all, it seems the ball spent a lot of the time in their
         | court, and not a lot in his. Either they want the guy or they
         | don't, he shouldn't have to spend months jumping through hoops
         | for the position if they are legitimately interested in his
         | work.
         | 
         | It kinda reads like a Nigeria scam: Just give us one more month
         | and you'll get the money, I swear. It's tied up with customs
         | right now, so if you could just do this one thing...
         | 
         | Whatever bureaucracy they have to deal with is entirely their
         | problem, not his. This tedious non-committal nonsense is not
         | something you should tolerate from anyone. Sure if it's a 2
         | person startup things may not be smooth, but this is Microsoft
         | we're talking about. They should have their shit together more
         | than that.
         | 
         | Within the general context of someone offering you a position
         | based on your work, they have the privilege of talking to you
         | and should be expected to treat you at least like a peer and
         | not like some random job applicant desperate to get hired.
         | 
         | I don't mean to suggest you should be a diva about it, but that
         | you should respect yourself and be willing to say no to anyone
         | who doesn't.
        
       | fartcannon wrote:
       | This is why you use, at the very least, a version of the GPL. But
       | he used Apache. So he basically did Microsofts job for them for
       | free.
        
         | protomyth wrote:
         | They didn't use his code so license is irrelevant.
        
         | Hakashiro wrote:
         | Like someone else mentioned, this is not a source code issue. I
         | think 90% of the people who got pissed back then thought
         | Microsoft stole the code: get this, they didn't steal anything.
         | One is C++ and the other is C# so it is literally impossible
         | for a license to matter here. This would have been solved only
         | with software patents. But I can very easily guess you're
         | against software patents, aren't you? Or only when they're used
         | by big evil corporations.
         | 
         | I hope next time you put a little thought into things you get
         | outraged about.
         | 
         | Oh, and the cherry on top is you victim-shaming him. "So
         | stupid, he used the wrong license".
         | 
         | You claim to with the good fight but in reality you only want
         | to win Internet battles to enlarge your own ego.
        
           | fartcannon wrote:
        
       | kh_hk wrote:
       | I say the following not knowing anything about appget internals.
       | 
       | I hope I could find proper words to express the sour feelings
       | when there's not enough credit given. It's always easy to dismiss
       | something as: "gee, thats the obvious way to do it, there's
       | nothing unique about it". Novel ideas always turn out to be
       | obvious once they are implemented. The foundations of knowledge
       | are based on the same principle. Standing on the shoulders of
       | giants. The contrary, not giving credit, is just the nasty
       | opposite. Appearing taller, by standing on your shoulders.
        
         | svnpenn wrote:
         | Exactly. Some "simple solution" might just be the end result of
         | months or years of different iterations. Sometimes you can't
         | know the best method until you've slowly and methodically tried
         | all the worse ones.
        
       | jka wrote:
       | Note that Microsoft currently sponsors the author of AppGet on
       | GitHub.
       | 
       | (that began some time between 2021-04-16 and 2021-05-19 according
       | to archive.org)
       | 
       | [1] -
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20210416144938/https://github.co...
       | 
       | [2] -
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20210519125607/https://github.co...
        
         | dustinmoris wrote:
         | Prince Andrew has also just paid his victims _cough_ a person
         | he has never met.
        
           | jka wrote:
           | There's a potential interpretation of Microsoft's sponsorship
           | as "a financial gesture to minimize a problem", sure. Without
           | knowing more about the story, though (and there's no
           | requirement for the author or Microsoft to share more
           | details), perhaps we won't really know.
        
       | pwr-electronics wrote:
       | > the outcome of the meeting as far as I understood it was, what
       | can Microsoft do to help?
       | 
       | Here's the problem. That's sales talk. If you're not buying,
       | either give your sales pitch or quote them for consulting.
        
       | david_allison wrote:
       | (2020)
        
         | q2loyp wrote:
         | Corrected, thanks
        
       | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
       | Here's an oldie, but goodie:
       | http://www.theparticle.com/fun/fun.php?topic=microsoft&id=18...
        
       | alias_neo wrote:
       | I've read this several times before, and every time I do it hurts
       | just as much.
       | 
       | Every time I read of another person who built something useful,
       | so much so that it gets recognised by big-corp X, and being
       | called in by Google or Microsoft, promised the recognition (and
       | pay) they deserve, then having the rug pulled at light-speed from
       | under them, I take it personally.
       | 
       | I'm amazed, every time I read "The Day AppGet Died" at the
       | restraint shown, which makes it hurt that little bit more.
       | 
       | Keivan should probably be a (multi) millionaire now, sitting
       | comfortably with his family doing whatever it is they enjoy
       | doing. Instead, someone at Microsoft used this as a way to get
       | themselves a promotion.
       | 
       | Don't be fooled by the lipstick, Microsoft has never stopped
       | being EEEvil.
        
         | smoldesu wrote:
         | Kinda reminds me of the whole Flicktype debacle. Pretty much
         | every company of a certain size has their fair share of bad
         | management and traitorous corporate ladder-climbers. We, the
         | users, are powerless to stop this.
        
           | fartcannon wrote:
           | What? You have all the power. You send an email and then stop
           | buying their services.
           | 
           | 'To whom it concerns, you guys are shitty so I'm cancelling
           | services.'
        
             | smoldesu wrote:
             | Sure, just delete your iCloud account, Microsoft account,
             | Amazon account, Netflix account and Google account. It's so
             | easy that anyone could do it!
        
               | fartcannon wrote:
               | It really is that easy.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | tut-urut-utut wrote:
               | iCloud - you don't really need an alternative.
               | 
               | Microsoft - You have many alternatives to Microsoft
               | software. Linux, Libre Office, Java, Python, IntelliJ,
               | ... pick one, or more.
               | 
               | Amazon - there are so many other stores. And cloud
               | providers if you are into that.
               | 
               | Netflix - just another streaming service. You can decide
               | how to consume media in many different ways.
               | 
               | Google - Mail you can host anywhere, it's not like Gmail
               | is special. Online productivity suites are not that rare
               | as once. If you insist on Youtube you can use it without
               | an account, Android with fake account.
               | 
               | If you find yourself you can't switch, you are into much
               | bigger trouble. It's ok to be burned once, but next time
               | you start you new SaaS startup, think twice do you want
               | to depend on specific company for all your needs.
        
               | luciusdomitius wrote:
               | Out of those I only have Google, even though I use it
               | only for spam e-mails these days, having opted for
               | Protonmail for the real stuff. The only reason I still
               | have a Google Account is that my Pinephone Pro hasn't
               | arrived yet. Once I get it and figure out it fills my
               | most critical needs, the Google account gets shredded
               | too.
               | 
               | Giving up on Netflix and Spotify was much less difficult
               | than expected.
        
         | luciusdomitius wrote:
         | Well. Cold reality is that even 5-year old kids know what sort
         | of company MSFT is and what sort of people work for them. He
         | acted like an useful fool, got treated like one. I even smirked
         | a bit at his misery, even though I am normally not that kind of
         | person.
         | 
         | Had he instead reacted to the phone call with some extremely
         | aggressive licensing, maybe even a software patent, now he
         | would be discussing the terms of the out of court settlement
         | and choosing a color for individual seats in his new 7-series.
        
           | jjoonathan wrote:
           | Yes, that's an important takeaway, but
           | 
           | > I even smirked a bit at his misery
           | 
           | smirking at someone for getting rolled is low.
        
             | bacchusracine wrote:
             | >smirking at someone for getting rolled is low.
             | 
             | Is it still low when it is self-inflicted? That old fable
             | with the finisher at the end about 'you knew me for what I
             | was when you picked me up' comes to mind. This ending was
             | clear from the beginning.
             | 
             | Microsoft is the same company who licensed Mosaic from
             | Spyglass with the promise of a quarterly fee plus royalties
             | and then released their version of the browser as Internet
             | Explorer for free resulting in no royalties. Never mind the
             | history of companies who got in bed with Microsoft and
             | never quite recovered afterwards. Or the history of blatant
             | ripoffs. DoubleSpace anyone?
             | 
             | Anyone choosing to get in bed with Microsoft at this point
             | gets what they deserve. There was a reason why they were
             | literally paying companies to write apps for Windows Phone.
        
           | Shared404 wrote:
           | > Cold reality is that even 5-year old kids know what sort of
           | company MSFT is and what sort of people work for them.
           | 
           | Mate, 80% of college students don't know that.
           | 
           | Source: Work at a computer repair shop and see shocked faces.
        
             | CRConrad wrote:
             | Then again most five-year-olds seem smarter than most
             | college students.
        
               | Shared404 wrote:
               | I dunno.
               | 
               | They're both larval stages, just different ones.
               | 
               | As far as knowing about the workings of a company, I'd
               | definitely bet on the college student. The observation in
               | my other comment applies to general adults as well.
               | 
               | Ok I'll stop taking the joke too seriously now :P .
        
               | CRConrad wrote:
               | College students have spent much longer being
               | indoctrinated that corporations are good, and the bigger
               | the better, than have five-year-olds. In that sense the
               | joke actually was -- at least to some small part --
               | serious.
        
           | jmcgough wrote:
           | How is he going to take out a patent for or aggressively
           | license OSS? The code is already out for anyone to use at
           | that point.
        
         | fraktl wrote:
        
         | [deleted]
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | electroly wrote:
         | > Keivan should probably be a (multi) millionaire now, sitting
         | comfortably with his family doing whatever it is they enjoy
         | doing. Instead, someone at Microsoft used this as a way to get
         | themselves a promotion.
         | 
         | To be fair, AppGet was never really that popular, and
         | Microsoft's replacement is even less so. I'd be surprised if
         | anyone got a promotion based on their WinGet work. There has
         | been no significant adoption of WinGet in the market. They're
         | lucky Microsoft doesn't dissolve the team. We use Chocolatey
         | instead, which I think is more popular (but still not very
         | popular).
         | 
         | I have no horse in the race, nor do I know anything special
         | about this situation, but it's fairly clear to me that the
         | author failed the interview. I don't know if he understands
         | that and is trying to downplay it, or if he doesn't realize
         | that's what happened. That's why everything dried up after the
         | interview, and why the followup says the position "didn't work
         | out."
        
           | CRConrad wrote:
           | > it's fairly clear to me that the author failed the
           | interview.
           | 
           | What's important here is _how_ he  "failed the interview": He
           | was probably never going to pass it. They'd already "failed"
           | him beforehand for being an Open Source freak; the whole
           | charade was just to string him along.
        
             | intern4tional wrote:
             | Microsoft employs many people that are open-source
             | advocates. Someone's perspective on that would not impact
             | their status in an interview.
             | 
             | If anything, the reason feedback took forever to him was
             | because someone may have asked for an exception to the
             | interview failure so they could hire him. Large companies
             | are behemoths and things do go wrong, mistakes are made,
             | and Microsoft did own up to it in this case
             | (https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/winget-install-
             | le...) but open source did not play a part in it.
             | 
             | Source: myself, I worked at Microsoft in a past life and
             | did many interviews. No one cares about someone's stance on
             | open source anymore.
        
           | arepublicadoceu wrote:
           | > I'd be surprised if anyone got a promotion based on their
           | WinGet work. There has been no significant adoption of WinGet
           | in the market.
           | 
           | Because it's an terrible implementation of a package
           | management. Don't get me wrong, it's better than nothing but
           | still...
           | 
           | For instance:
           | 
           | - we can't pin packages (there's an open issue for God knows
           | how long) Problem with that is that if you do "winget upgrade
           | --all" it will upgrade all your programs even those that you
           | don't want to upgrade. The alternative is simply upgrading
           | one by one.
           | 
           | - Some programs have a problem with their version (GOG Galaxy
           | for instance). Winget simply doesn't know that there's no
           | newer version available and keep trying to upgrade everytime
           | you do "winget upgrade -all". This, in turn, make the
           | previous point more annoying as I can't say to winget ignore
           | "GOG Galaxy" and upgrade all the other packages.
           | 
           | - Some programs are downloaded from websites that are
           | probably heavily throttling downloads from winget, this make
           | downloading qbittorrent (20mb) takes a LONG time and usually
           | failing.
           | 
           | I have no idea of how to fix these issues as I'm just a user
           | but there's a stark difference between using windows winget
           | and apt or pacman.
        
             | easton wrote:
             | > Some programs have a problem with their version (GOG
             | Galaxy for instance). Winget simply doesn't know that
             | there's no newer version available and keep trying to
             | upgrade everytime you do "winget upgrade -all". This, in
             | turn, make the previous point more annoying as I can't say
             | to winget ignore "GOG Galaxy" and upgrade all the other
             | packages.
             | 
             | This was resolved in the latest preview release (well, the
             | PR merged a couple months ago, but they seem to release
             | once every million years). If you want to upgrade to
             | preview temporarily it will still automatically update to
             | stable releases.
             | 
             | https://github.com/microsoft/winget-
             | cli/releases/tag/v1.3.43...
             | 
             | https://github.com/microsoft/winget-cli/pull/1765
        
             | CRConrad wrote:
             | > Problem with that is that if you do "winget upgrade
             | --all" it will upgrade all your programs even those that
             | you don't want to upgrade. The alternative is simply
             | upgrading one by one.
             | 
             | Well, TBF, that's exactly what "winget upgrade _--all "_
             | sounds like it _should_ do.
        
               | arepublicadoceu wrote:
               | Every Linux package manager that I use have an option to
               | hold one or more packages from upgrading. It's common
               | sense that one or more piece of software might break on
               | update and the user should be able to hold it until a fix
               | arrive. Even arch where it's heavily discouraged to do
               | partial upgrades have an option to pin packages.
               | 
               | What winget upgrade ---all *should* do is to follow this
               | common sense and do a upgrade all /minus package that the
               | user choose not to upgrade.
        
           | stjohnswarts wrote:
           | They also don't really promote it as far as I can tell. I
           | didn't find out about it until I was looking up some stuff
           | about choco. It's terrible what they did to this guy. I know
           | he shared his stuff as open source but still to string him
           | along for over a year whilst also having a team working on
           | what he had built and barely acknowledging it or helping him
           | out in some way.
        
           | aranchelk wrote:
           | > it's fairly clear to me that the author failed the
           | interview
           | 
           | I'm not so sure. The interview could have been a pretense to
           | get more information, e.g. strategy for future development.
           | 
           | Also, in a sufficiently machiavellian environment, candidates
           | can easily "fail" interviews by just seeming smarter than the
           | hiring manager, scaring that manager into thinking they'll be
           | leapfrogged.
        
           | easton wrote:
           | winget is protected as it's providing the API for the
           | Microsoft Store to manage Win32 apps. I think there's been a
           | decent amount of adoption, there's lots of install pages (Git
           | is one I noticed recently) that have winget install right
           | next to brew install.
        
             | electroly wrote:
             | That's an interesting bit about the Microsoft Store; I
             | didn't know that. Thanks!
        
           | alias_neo wrote:
           | Admittedly I don't have any experience with this sort of
           | thing, but I have always read it as; Microsoft want his work,
           | they should have just paid him X million for it, or paid him
           | to keep working on it.
           | 
           | Instead, they made it into some sort of interview, got all of
           | his input then went off and copy-paste'd the code (an
           | exaggeration) into WinGet and ghosted him.
           | 
           | To add insult to injury he got a nice little "fuck you" the
           | day before they released it.
        
       | derkoe wrote:
       | Please don't use any of these. Use scoop - it just works
       | https://github.com/ScoopInstaller/scoop No admin needed for
       | almost all packages, "scoop update *" to update your system,
       | authoring packages is very easy.
        
         | chem83 wrote:
         | I like an I use scoop alongside winget after many years of
         | Chocolatey, but there are many packages not available through
         | scoop, mostly because there isn't a viable portable way to
         | install them. Also, scoop does nothing to take advantage of the
         | MSIX Containers that sandbox apps, so that they can be cleanly
         | update and later removed.
         | 
         | I'm considering automating the conversion of my most used apps
         | to MSIX, so they can get always installed in a clean way. That
         | may break certain apps like Steam, which need to install
         | outside the virtual FS, but I hear MSIX supports global
         | registry an global FS access exceptions nowadays, so not all
         | hope is lost.
        
           | Jenk wrote:
           | All scoop does is extract installers/archives from the
           | applications own portable distributions, and then create
           | shims for them. Scoop packages aren't actually packages. They
           | are just manifests that point to a URL to the apps download,
           | and a list of executables to make shims/shortcuts for and
           | that is it.
           | 
           | There's the nonportable bucket for apps that have er..
           | nonportable versions.
        
       | morelish wrote:
       | Good read. I've used chocolatey a lot plus a lot of other
       | Microsoft installation tools. Windows has been crying out for a
       | decent package manager for years. It's amazing how little of a
       | sh*t Microsoft seemed to give about stuff that open-source
       | systems provide as a first class citizen.
       | 
       | As they care next-to-zero about decent tooling, it's no surprise
       | they care even less about independent developers like Keivan.
       | 
       | I'm pretty sure Windows is going to turn into a Linux kernel with
       | a Windows API translation layer and specialised UI system for
       | ordinary Joes.
       | 
       | I think it's probably a lot more efficient that way and Microsoft
       | has already lost the kernel battle to Linux. With the shift to
       | the cloud, I assume Azure will become Microsoft's dominant
       | revenue stream, with Office second and Windows third.
       | 
       | At least that my guess.
        
         | chem83 wrote:
         | There's very little incentive to adopt Linux as a kernel given
         | how popular Microsoft is with consumer grade OEMs developing
         | for the WHQL driver program. That's one point of competitive
         | advantage Microsoft would be nuts to let go off.
         | 
         | Also, sysinternals and psh alone are very compelling examples
         | of sophisticated tooling for the Windows ecosystem. So much so
         | that they were ported to other platforms for the Windows users
         | wanting to explore Mac and Linux.
         | 
         | And while Microsoft failed so far to create a decent package
         | management solution for Windows, the problem really isn't how
         | to manage packages, but rather how Win32 software assumes
         | certain levels of access to system internals. This problem was
         | mostly solved with the introduction of MSIX, so Microsoft needs
         | to find a better carrot to incentivize developers to deploy
         | with MSIX so winget can work properly.
        
       | transfire wrote:
       | What open source license did AppGet use?
       | 
       | Seemed to me we need some carefully worded clause that help
       | provide some compensation if something like this happens.
       | 
       | But M$ should be ashamed of themselves for not at least offering
       | some compensation.
        
         | notriddle wrote:
         | It didn't matter what license he used, because Microsoft
         | reimplemented it from scratch anyway.
        
         | magpi3 wrote:
         | Apache. And winget-cli is licensed under the MIT license. So
         | although the licenses are incompatible, the end result would
         | have been the same even if Microsoft had simply forked winget
         | with the Apache license, although in that case they would have
         | had to credit the original author, and the lack of credit is
         | the original author's main issue with how this was handled.
        
         | pedro2 wrote:
         | AFAIK they copied no code. Just everything else.
        
       | scim-knox-twox wrote:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=keivan.io
        
         | piceas wrote:
         | The Day AppGet Died (keivan.io) 1930 points by lostmsu on May
         | 27, 2020 | past | 535 comments
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23331287
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | pengwing wrote:
       | As founder and main developer of a product, I feel that both the
       | first suggestion of an aqui-hire and the second suggestion of
       | getting a regular job at MSFT are completely ludicrous. Far too
       | weak.
       | 
       | Framing this as becoming an employee at MSFT directly establishes
       | a position of inferiority. This should have been about a
       | licensing deal with the option to purchase some premium support
       | on top to facilitate the integration. A B2B deal will never
       | involve HR.
       | 
       | You don't have to be a tough negotiator yourself, but then please
       | seek advice from a manager representing you.
        
         | stjohnswarts wrote:
         | Yeah unless you are a Kernighan or Torvalds or Vanrossum aqui-
         | hire doesn't seem like a real thing because middle management
         | can never stand to have someone who isn't 100% under their
         | power.
        
       | joshu wrote:
       | I had a similar story with Yahoo but rejected the job offer. A
       | few years later they had to buy the company anyway.
        
         | stjohnswarts wrote:
         | Yeah this is a learning lesson no doubt. Management of a
         | company can never put up with a person who isn't 100% under
         | their control. Only the top 0.001% of developers will get away
         | with that. Better to realize they want what you have and you
         | have to figure out some way to get a handle on that or realize
         | like this poor guy in a year some internal team has copied what
         | you did and they have 100x the resources that you have.
        
       | orangepurple wrote:
       | Now I understand what Tuco meant when he said "Sometimes you
       | gotta rob to keep your riches."
        
       | ijidak wrote:
       | I'd recommend retaining a lawyer as soon as a large company like
       | Microsoft reaches out to you. (Even if it's just for your private
       | education of risks, rights and strategy.)
       | 
       | Alternatively, start billing for time and travel immediately.
       | 
       | If they don't want to pay, tell them to meet you locally. (Let
       | them incur travel expenses.)
       | 
       | This will force the company to demonstrate their intent.
       | 
       | If they balk at both requests, this shows that:
       | 
       | 1. They don't have managerial approval for their escapade.
       | 
       | Or...
       | 
       | 2. They intend to take advantage of you to the extent that they
       | can.
       | 
       | Either way, it shows they need to get their ducks in a row. And
       | prepare themselves to treat your time as valuable.
        
       | LeonB wrote:
       | This caused a big splash at the time.
       | 
       | Here's some links on 'what happened next' (though I'd love to
       | know what else has happened since!)
       | 
       | - "Microsoft finally gives AppGet developer the credit he
       | deserves"
       | (https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2020/6/2/21277863/micr...)
       | 
       | Microsoft response:
       | 
       | - "winget install learning" by "Andrew" at Microsoft
       | (https://devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/winget-install-le...)
        
         | gdcbe wrote:
         | I find it a bit shallow that they throw around these words so
         | easily. The apologies would have a bit more worth IMHO if they
         | actually would compensate him financially for the foundational
         | work. Sure it's not a legal requirement but I do believe it is
         | the right thing to do and it's not like they would feel it...
        
           | 908B64B197 wrote:
           | There wasn't anything foundational.
           | 
           | The author himself said he wanted to replicate the package
           | managers available on Linux.
        
       | a2tech wrote:
       | Don't ever forget that at its core Microsoft is still the same
       | company we grew up with. Just because they're singing sweet songs
       | now doesn't mean they're fundamentally different.
       | 
       | I know that there are a lot of developers on here that disagree
       | with me and are all in on the 'new' Microsoft. I can't change
       | your mind. Ive watched Microsoft since the early 90s though and
       | they've never really changed---and buying GitHub and releasing
       | some things as open source doesn't change things a bit.
        
         | skrebbel wrote:
         | Just a nit: I fully agree with you that deep inside, Microsoft
         | is still as evil as in the past (competition forced them to
         | hide it a bit better is all). But I'm still all in on the `new'
         | Microsoft. I don't think these two necessarily exclude each
         | other.
         | 
         | I mean the alternatives are Linux, which I haven't the patience
         | for, or Apple which is also evil but just in different ways.
        
           | fartcannon wrote:
           | You deserve what you get then.
        
         | causi wrote:
         | _Just because they're singing sweet songs now doesn't mean
         | they're fundamentally different._
         | 
         | Frankly I think it's only because Google, Facebook, et al.
         | invented new kinds of evil too fast for Microsoft to keep up
         | that they seemed warm and fuzzy at all. They're still the
         | company that force-upgraded users to Windows 10, and they're
         | still the company that's requiring you to have a Microsoft
         | account for future versions of Windows 11.
        
           | rob74 wrote:
           | Well in my book the order is still something like Google < M$
           | < Facebook < Amazon when it comes to "evilness". Not sure
           | where I would rank Apple on that scale (and I also don't use
           | Apple products a lot), so I left them out.
           | 
           | About Windows 11: I switched my home desktop PC to Linux when
           | I upgraded it early last year. I still have Windows 8 lying
           | around mostly unused on a partition, but since it's a 32 bit
           | version I would have to do a complete reinstall, and most of
           | the software I'm using (including most games, thanks to
           | Steam) runs just fine on Linux, so I haven't worked up the
           | motivation to do it yet. And stories like this don't really
           | increase my urge to install Windows...
        
             | fartcannon wrote:
             | Apple and Microsoft are equals.
        
             | Shared404 wrote:
             | > Well in my book the order is still something like Google
             | < M$ < Facebook < Amazon when it comes to "evilness".
             | 
             | I find this an interesting order to think about. Amazon has
             | directly lead to fatalities and ( I would describe as ) an
             | abusive work environment, but Facebook I would say has done
             | more harm on a larger "societal shift" scale.
             | 
             | I suppose just looking at direct consequences of actions, I
             | agree with your assessment - Amazon knowingly builds itself
             | of labor abuse, and Facebook can at least lie to
             | themselves.
        
           | justsomehnguy wrote:
           | > requiring you to have a Microsoft account for future
           | versions of Windows 11.
           | 
           | How quickly people forgot about mandatory iTunes
           | activation...
           | 
           | > They're still the company that force-upgraded users to
           | Windows 10
           | 
           | This is response for all those cries what MS should take the
           | security of the OS seriously. No wonder what after _a decade_
           | of disabled Windows Update on the endpoints (to conserve
           | resources, to not to receive WPA update so a pirated copy
           | would continue to work, so it wouldn 't waste the precious
           | Internet traffic and bunch of other ridiculous reasons) they
           | took the forced approach.
        
             | causi wrote:
             | But that forced approach only worked on the people who had
             | auto-update enabled. For people like me who had WU disabled
             | it didn't affect me at all.
        
               | justsomehnguy wrote:
               | > For people like me who had WU disabled
               | 
               | ...
               | 
               | Yes. This is the reason it is so hard to disable WU now.
               | YOU are one of those reasons.
               | 
               | > forced approach only worked on the people who had auto-
               | update enabled
               | 
               | Also I want to hear what kind of magic should they used
               | to do that on people with WU disabled.
        
               | causi wrote:
               | I would've been one of those people, if I'd ever had a
               | security breach. At this point I've been saved so much
               | time and hassle not putting up with Microsoft's nonsense
               | I could spend a month dealing with a stolen identity and
               | I'd still come out on top. Of course I'm not one of the
               | numpties that runs untrusted JS in my browser or installs
               | rando programs.
        
               | vetinari wrote:
               | There's a reason WHY people disabled WU. Microsoft might
               | consider that, before going with heavy-handed approach.
        
               | robertlagrant wrote:
               | Also the fact that WU breaks things. Might be worth
               | considering that.
        
             | teh64 wrote:
             | > mandatory iTunes activation
             | 
             | Did macOS ever have mandatory activation? Because I have
             | used it for a long time and have never needed that. You
             | need some way to get a new OS version, which was buying a
             | new macOS version on a disk (back in the day), then on the
             | app store, and then it was a free upgrade from the app
             | store. But you never needed an account to run the actual
             | OS.
        
           | simion314 wrote:
           | And they are the company that bought Skype, forced me to
           | create Microsoft accounts and then mess things up, now they
           | boutght Minecraft and I just receive an ultimatum to switch
           | my Mojang account to a Microsoft account. F U MS, can't you
           | let me login with existing shit,.
           | 
           | On a different topic, I am using some MS APIs at work (TTS
           | stuff) and my impression of this MS products is bad, it feels
           | like different teams that hate each other were forced to work
           | on this shit and some other team is forced to cover it up
           | with documentation. I don't recommend MS stuff if you have
           | alternatives.
        
             | moron4hire wrote:
             | What are you talking about? Microsoft's Text-To-Speech APIs
             | are the best on the market. Google's are definitely a
             | distant second: not as many languages, not as many voices,
             | and the output is nowhere near as good. After those two,
             | there isn't really anything left worth mentioning.
        
               | causi wrote:
               | _Microsoft 's Text-To-Speech APIs are the best on the
               | market._
               | 
               | Wow, I had no idea they were that good. Is there a way to
               | get at them from a consumer level? For example, there are
               | plenty of e-reader apps that use Google's TTS to read
               | epub books as audiobooks. Anything similar for Microsoft
               | or is it all on the developer side?
        
               | AshamedCaptain wrote:
               | They have basically been licensing L&H then Nuance until
               | they bought it outright.
        
               | zidad wrote:
               | You can just try it out here from the browser if you
               | like:
               | 
               | https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/cognitive-
               | service...
        
               | causi wrote:
               | That's a good demo, but it isn't much use for making
               | audio content from ebooks.
        
               | hobo_mark wrote:
               | Transcribing an entire ebook this way is going to be
               | _expensive_.
        
               | simion314 wrote:
               | I am talking about they have one documentation but if you
               | look deeper there are 2 products, thay say here are 2
               | options long and short API , but look closer and see one
               | uses names like "Name", "Voice" the other "name", "voice"
               | , the list of voices of this 2 options are not the same ,
               | and you randomly get weird errors with shit message that
               | will solve themselves in the next few days. If my memory
               | is correct you authenticate in2 different ways.
               | 
               | So I would prefer MS do this;
               | 
               | 1 this is our 2 completly different and incompatible APIs
               | , they might look similar but are not the same, outpiut
               | can differ even if you send same params to each one
               | 
               | 2 give me good error messages, like if is your fault a
               | request fails make it clear , if is my input the problem
               | make it clear it is me and what is wrong
        
               | moron4hire wrote:
               | I mean, there's the old Windows-only SAPI from the
               | Windows XP days that they haven't been developing for
               | several years now, and the current Azure Cognitive
               | Services, which is just a REST API with a pretty standard
               | auth scheme. There's an official .NET package for
               | wrapping that REST API, but it's certainly not necessary
               | to use it if you know how to handle REST APIs. Is that
               | what you're talking about?
        
               | simion314 wrote:
               | Yes, the Azure API, there are 2 different things under
               | the hood, the short and login APIs, that are different
               | names, different auth headers, different voices
               | supported, voices with same name that have different
               | styles supported. Bad errors messages that popup and get
               | fixed in a few days but only on one of the APIs. The
               | issue is that I am trying to combine the short and long
               | APIs in one product and I am hitting this big
               | inconsistencies, I see lcearly there are 2 teams and do
               | things different , if you use only one section you have a
               | completly different experience.
               | 
               | Edit. I do the REST calls directly, not via an SDK and
               | use the documentation from MS for the REST API so no SDK
               | documentation or SDK code that hides the issues.
        
             | stickfigure wrote:
             | I don't understand this complaint. You _want_ separate
             | logins for every service? You can 't even argue that there
             | are privacy issues - these are now all part of the same
             | company.
             | 
             | Separate logins incur a cost to both the service operator
             | (who has to run multiple secure identity systems, build
             | multiple 2FA systems, manage multiple customer service
             | teams, etc) and the client (who has to remember multiple
             | passwords). Consolidation of identity services is natural.
             | One secure login is better than dozens of insecure ones.
             | 
             | Before you yell "password manager" admit that the average
             | person doesn't even know what a password manager is. "Every
             | user changes their workflow" is not a practical solution.
        
               | stjohnswarts wrote:
               | Yeah, people like to block off parts of their life. It's
               | not really that hard to manage accounts with password
               | managers and saved sessions. Microsoft doesn't need to
               | have everything at their greedy little fingertips to data
               | mine.
        
               | simion314 wrote:
               | This is a lame excuse, say what after the forced account
               | migration is my pourchase invalid? Will Microsoft just
               | drop the db table with my purchase and logins? Will they
               | refuse to migrate people after?
               | 
               | No, they have to keep all that data and confirm even 2
               | years from now that I paid for this game and migrate my
               | logins ,
               | 
               | Tell me know what is more expensive
               | 
               | 1 Keep the Mojang logins for Java edition. do nothing
               | 
               | 2 Write ton of code to force migrate Java edition players
               | into the XBox ,Microsoft accounts.
               | 
               | It is not lke I can play from Linux PC with an XBox
               | person multiplayer so there is Zero benefit for me, just
               | some mangers and develoeprs at MS getting busy. They
               | fucked up my skype account move so this is why I don't
               | like when they are trying to move me to their shit
               | account, Now what? when they block my MS account I lose
               | Skype and Minecraft too?
        
               | causi wrote:
               | _They fucked up my skype account move_
               | 
               | Ah yes, the old "you had a Microsoft account you didn't
               | know about so when we merged the two any contacts you
               | didn't have on both accounts were permanently erased"
               | trick. Happened to me.
        
               | zimpenfish wrote:
               | > You want separate logins for every service?
               | 
               | I want a separate login for Minecraft than for MS
               | services, yes.
               | 
               | > the client (who has to remember multiple passwords)
               | 
               | I'd guess that the majority of Mojang accounts don't have
               | a corresponding MS account already.
               | 
               | > "Every user changes their workflow" is not a practical
               | solution.
               | 
               | But that's precisely what MS are enforcing - you have to
               | migrate your Mojang account to an MS account.
        
               | tomrod wrote:
               | > You want separate logins for every service?
               | 
               | In short: yes.
               | 
               | In long: I want separate logins for different domains. In
               | no universe should Minecraft share a login service with
               | Azure cloud engineering. And I shouldn't have to log in
               | to use offline applications locally. And teams should
               | support different logins for many accounts, like Slack
               | figured out ages ago. By forcing changes to the login
               | pattern for negligible to negative consumer benefit, it's
               | clear Microsoft continues to be broken.
               | 
               | Microsoft and login services are terrible, and uniting
               | them under one login to rule them all doesn't help.
        
               | stickfigure wrote:
               | You can create as many Microsoft logins as you like. If
               | you want to separate Minecraft and Azure, go ahead. But
               | there's no reason this requires separate authentication
               | technology or infrastructure.
        
               | causi wrote:
               | I'm talking about using your PC, not logging into
               | Microsoft's online services. Using the same account for
               | Microsoft's possessions like Xbox and Minecraft and Skype
               | makes sense. That's fine. But you know something?
               | _Microsoft doesn 't own my god damned computer._
        
         | CRConrad wrote:
         | There are still a few of us who remember; I've tried posting
         | responses here when the Nadella Kool-Aid gets too thick. But on
         | the whole, kids nowadays -- even on here -- are far too easily
         | impressed by superficial "Internet and Open Source-friendly"
         | bling-bling BS.
         | 
         | (Geroffmylawn, punks.)
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | 908B64B197 wrote:
       | This story gets reposted on HN quite often, and makes it to the
       | front page. Several things don't add up in it.
       | 
       | The author claims that code was copied but I looked at both repos
       | and they share no code at all. [0] [1]
       | 
       | In his article, the author claims that " If I were the patenting
       | type, this would be the thing you would patent. ps. I don't
       | regret not patenting anything." That's really not how patents
       | work, and looking at the repo, a second year CS student could do
       | the same really. I don't see anything that could remotely be
       | patented. It reads where to find the installer from a config file
       | and determine what to do based on an enum.
       | 
       | He himself goes on to say he tried replicating the user
       | experience from several existing package managers available on
       | Linux. And Microsoft did create Nuget 12 years prior to AppGet.
       | I'll give some leeway to the author since I don't think the
       | author ever filed for a patent so he might not be familiar with
       | the concept of prior art.
       | 
       | Throughout the article the author uses the term acqui-hire but it
       | seems Microsoft was simply considering him for a PM position (and
       | he failed the interview). There's nothing to acquire since
       | there's no patent, no IP and no brand. Only a registered domain
       | and what seems like an anemic userbase, if any.
       | 
       | I've done acqui-hires in the past and that's not what the author
       | describes. First you never deal with HR, there's no regular
       | interview (especially not at a hiring event and with other
       | candidate present) and there's always a contract. I get that the
       | author isn't really in a tier one market so he might not be
       | familiar with how it's done (or maybe customs are different where
       | he's from?) but what should have tipped him is that he never
       | spoke to anyone from legal about licenses, only to an engineer
       | who then referred him to HR...
       | 
       | However, the author is quite clever. Being featured in The
       | Verge[0] and on HN's front page will probably bring a lot more
       | eyeballs to the startups he's trying to promote. So
       | congratulation to him for the free advertising!
       | 
       | [0] https://github.com/microsoft/winget-cli
       | 
       | [1] https://github.com/appget/appget
       | 
       | [2] https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/28/21272964/microsoft-
       | winget...
        
         | jmcgough wrote:
         | He never claims that his code was copied - just that they used
         | the same approach and a lot of similar patterns.
         | 
         | Regardless of what happened, it sounds like they left him
         | hanging without even the courtesy of a follow-up email. Going
         | from being ghosted to having MS release their own version of
         | your OSS project after they've asked you a lot of technical
         | details about how it works would leave a sour taste in anyone's
         | mouth.
         | 
         | Most people don't get acquihired, so I don't blame him for not
         | understanding how it works (nor is he from the states). What
         | he's really talking about is being hired to keep working on
         | AppGet, he's not talking about having the project itself
         | acquired (since it's an OSS license).
         | 
         | I doubt there was intentional malice here but they really
         | screwed up in how they communicated with him, and that can't
         | help encourage devs to work on the windows ecosystem.
        
           | 908B64B197 wrote:
           | > Going from being ghosted to having MS release their own
           | version of your OSS project after they've asked you a lot of
           | technical details about how it works would leave a sour taste
           | in anyone's mouth.
           | 
           | I don't think they asked him a lot. The code was all there,
           | and WinGet doesn't share anything with it.
           | 
           | To me, it sounds like he failed his PM interview. That's why
           | they stopped talking to him.
        
       | WesolyKubeczek wrote:
       | I dunno, getting inspired and copying all the ideas, deciding
       | that they can do a good enough job internally instead of hiring
       | Keivan doesn't sound like a bad thing in and of itself.
       | 
       | It's the stringing along that makes my blood boil. After reading
       | things like this, I'm thinking, what I'd do differently?
       | 
       | Maybe have them reimburse all my travel upfront. No money, no
       | meetings.
       | 
       | Also, bill all the meetings and conversations. Up front, given
       | their reputation from this story. They want to spend my time,
       | better show how serious they are. No money, no meetings, no false
       | hopes.
       | 
       | But they know young geeks can be excited that someone at THE
       | Microsoft noticed them, like in the Hollywood success stories,
       | and walk an extra mile. Who knows, I could have lost my shit 20
       | years ago. This straight up exploitation irks me to no end.
       | Reminds me of rock stars bedding teenage fangirls and similar
       | shit, maybe this is why.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | indymike wrote:
         | >I dunno, getting inspired and copying all the ideas, deciding
         | that they can do a good enough job internally instead of hiring
         | Keivan doesn't sound like a bad thing in and of itself.
         | 
         | This is one of these things where you have to go, what did they
         | loose by not investing in or hiring Keivan? Would the product
         | be better, would it have got more traction, etc. Here's a
         | juxtaposition: MS bought Github (yes, bigger scale) and chose
         | not to build their own. The result was really good for MS, and
         | honestly, not bad for Github users. MS needs to get better (and
         | they are getting better) at using investment and acquisition
         | instead of brainfscking and re-innovating. To be fair, maybe
         | there's more to the story?
        
         | john_moscow wrote:
         | >I dunno, getting inspired and copying all the ideas, deciding
         | that they can do a good enough job internally instead of hiring
         | Keivan doesn't sound like a bad thing in and of itself.
         | 
         | It just completely kills the motivation to make any kind of
         | system tools like this. If your tool fails, you have wasted
         | your time. If it succeeds, the OS vendor will kill it overnight
         | with a free knock-off, so you have also wasted your time.
         | 
         | OS/platform vendors should know it better if they want to
         | maintain a thriving ecosystem of contributors, but nobody seems
         | to care anymore. Shops knocking off most successful products
         | with store brands, Apple doing the same with some popular apps,
         | Amazon Basics, this. And then we wonder why so many people are
         | depressed and don't see a future for themselves anymore.
        
           | piyh wrote:
           | You could release your code with a less permissive license
           | (say excluding companies with a 1 trillion dollar market cap)
           | so they at least have to play ball with you.
        
             | chasil wrote:
             | The GPLv3 might be enough to do that, for some. It was
             | sufficient concern for Apple, who dumped Samba, bash, and
             | gcc.
             | 
             | Microsoft's CBL/Mariner distribution of Linux would be the
             | first place to look for GPLv3, and and impacts upon their
             | patent portfolio (I haven't read up on the patent
             | provisions).
             | 
             | "Apple, a user of GCC and a heavy user of both DRM and
             | patents, switched the compiler in its Xcode IDE from GCC to
             | Clang, which is another FOSS compiler but is under a
             | permissive license. LWN speculated that Apple was motivated
             | partly by a desire to avoid GPLv3. The Samba project also
             | switched to GPLv3, so Apple replaced Samba in their
             | software suite by a closed-source, proprietary software
             | alternative."
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-
             | source_software#...
        
               | 908B64B197 wrote:
               | LLVM is also more modular. The front-end and back-ends
               | are well decoupled and it's possible to work on them
               | separately. Useful for a company that has to target two
               | CPU architectures.
        
               | [deleted]
        
       | andix wrote:
       | I don't get why he was so upset about it. Microsoft didn't want
       | to accept his offer. But still WinGet is not as good as AppGet.
       | So if he just had kept going his way with AppGet, maybe WinGet
       | would have never gotten any traction. Like a lot of projects,
       | Microsoft more or less abandoned WinGet right away. You still
       | can't do ,,winget update" and update all your installed packages.
       | For me one of the main features of a package manager.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | chem83 wrote:
         | Won't 'winget upgrade --all' do the trick for you?
        
       | allisdust wrote:
       | Wow that's quite a disgusting thing to do. It's surprising how
       | measured his take was.
       | 
       | It's a loss for them not him as I don't think he would have fit
       | in such backbiting culture. The whole episode is a warning for
       | anyone developing open source stuff and is talking to MS or any
       | big company.
        
       | axiomdata316 wrote:
       | It's kind of sad but it looks like Kevin hasn't posted anything
       | since this. I hope this experience didn't break him.
        
         | jmcgough wrote:
         | from https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/2/21277863/microsoft-
         | winget-...:
         | 
         | "We reached out to Beigi to comment on the blog post and
         | Microsoft's overall response, but the developer says he's still
         | in discussions with Microsoft over the issue."
         | 
         | That seems like it happened unrelated to giving him additional
         | credit. I wonder if they offered him something to sign a non-
         | disparagement agreement.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-02-18 23:01 UTC)