5.4 Microsoft

[mattjohnsonpint]

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.

• Microsoft's virtual machine offerings include HyperV and Windows Azure VMs, both of which are supported in running non-Windows operating systems.
• Microsoft's Azure environment explicitly embraces Linux. See Linux and Open-Source Computing on Azure, and Microsoft Loves Linux
• Microsoft has been producing Office for Macintosh, since Word for Mac debuted in 1984, and now has full versions of Office that run on OSX, iOS and Android.
• Microsoft's new open-source version of the .NET Framework runs on Linux and OSX.

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 The sentiment expressed in section 5.4 is outdated and should be revised or removed.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.

[markvincze]

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]

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]

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

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.

[mattjohnsonpint]

@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.