At one point they were all in on open source but the tune quickly changed when they saw how much profit they were leaving on the table.
Correction: At one point they said they were all-in on open source - 10 minutes after creating an innovative new open source product called ".net core", which is exactly like .net, but with all of the features you might actually be interested in stripped out.
Nobody in my circle talks about .net because we all saw immediately that it was just the same act again, if somewhat less openly hostile than Microsoft's previous MO.
But the things they stripped out that you say were "ms-specific" were only "ms-specific" because they didn't bother to port them along with the rest of core...
...And as a result, core didn't contain anything interesting, and there's no reason you'd use it.
Comments
Correction: At one point they said they were all-in on open source - 10 minutes after creating an innovative new open source product called ".net core", which is exactly like .net, but with all of the features you might actually be interested in stripped out.
Nobody in my circle talks about .net because we all saw immediately that it was just the same act again, if somewhat less openly hostile than Microsoft's previous MO.
What was the crucial functionality stripped in Core that's not completely MS-specific?
Nice trap!
But the things they stripped out that you say were "ms-specific" were only "ms-specific" because they didn't bother to port them along with the rest of core...
...And as a result, core didn't contain anything interesting, and there's no reason you'd use it.
Which is why nobody did