As if Win11 wasn't bad enough already.
This guy's full of shit, whoever he is. MSFT's not going to make themselves beholden to a language owned by Mozilla and a compiler backend owned by Apple, and there's not any reason to use a language like Rust if a machine is generating the code. MSFT makes their own languages and compilers.
I mean, saying something like "Our strategy is to use AI *and* Algorithms" sounds like someone just mashing words together.
Anyway, he's a researcher, he's supposed to be pushing weird shit out that, even if it works, only occasionally actually affects the company: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/people/galenh/ .
Not enough browns, trannies, and bugmen developing for it and with it.
They just can't do it.
Just think about how based and Chadlt the old Microsoft developers were: they went from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95 in 5 years. They went from Windows 95 Windows 2000 in another 4 years.
I do not believe for a second that given nine years the Microsoft of today could go from Windows 3.1 to Windows 2000. We're still basically running Windows 8 lite.
- replies
- 2
- announces
- 0
- likes
- 0
@p @leespringfield1903 The line before that is even more telling, emphasis added:
"My goal is to eliminate every line of C and C++ from Microsoft by 2030."
This is also Microsoft Research, which at least back in the Ballmer days was infamous about not being able to get their stuff out to Microsoft proper. Only exception I can think of right now is F#, an OCamel version of sorts for the CLR.
That said, if he's successful with a few big code bases and gets buy in, Microsoft ought to be able to take on the language support issues unless it's gotten too jeeted by then. They did after all abandon their own browser core in favor of Chromium, and started out as a language company.
@MCMLXVIIOTG @BroDrillard @leespringfield1903 microsoft needs to create their own AI driven rust compiler, no existing rust compilation tool integrates AI and that is so retrograde and simplistic.
And I think, you know, the glowies have taken from one end a harsh source-based means of "supply-chain security" and it means you have to use 2FA to log into jithub, and then on the other end they're interested in compiler guarantees that there won't be any more nop-sleds. There's the hard work of security and then there's the grasping for silver bullets and the latter is easier to get funding for. The vast majority of network application development is done in bytecode VM languages anyway.
I don't know who's funding LLVM nowadays, but Rust has apparently not managed to free itself from that.
The "Rust people" are a deluded cult of retards and will 100% fall for it.
> "My goal is to eliminate every line of C and C++ from Microsoft by 2030."
Yeah, I saw that, but that's what a research manager is saying, not a press release from the company or an MSDN blog post. I may be over-parsing it but that stuck out because he's a bit uneven about "my"/"our". Maybe he had an LLM write that.
> Only exception I can think of right now is F#,
Yeah, people talk about it positively; I don't even like the JVM so I don't touch Mono so I haven't used it, just read about it. I think TypeScript came out of Microsoft Research, too, but it's not very ergonomic even by Microsoft standards.
> They did after all abandon their own browser core in favor of Chromium, and started out as a language company.
Ha, I picked up a TRS-80 Model 100 when cash was less tight; still runs great.
If the Linux companies were as clever as Valve they would invest heavily into making sure Wine runs as many apps as flawlessly Valve does run games.
@p @leespringfield1903 I read the use of "Our" as "our team we're asking you to join...." I see a logical progression of:
- We want someone to join us in Redmond
- My goal for this project is insanely ambitious....
- Our team is using these techniques you might find interesting....
As for F#, I take it as more a "If you're using the CLR, here's a real ML family functional language you can use in your project." If you just want to use OCaml, you might use the native version, although JVM and I assume to an extent the CLR offer a lot of interfacing code.
Hmmm, and today, there's "AI" coding assistance for that sort of messy stuff which I assume works better for a popular language/runtime. I'm hearing some good stuff from experienced people who are doing in a few hours what would take them manually a couple of weeks. Good if for nothing else than failing fast if your idea turns out to be a bad one, for example.
> If you're using the CLR, here's a real ML family functional language you can use in your project."
Yeah, that's reasonable.
> I'm hearing some good stuff from experienced people who are doing in a few hours what would take them manually a couple of weeks.
Well, I can say that it has been useful as a fuzzy reference work. You know, you say "There's gotta be something in the stdlib for $language that does $x" and it'll generally be able to tell you. You can get them to shit out code but they don't do a reasonable job with architecture, and the code itself fits corporate best practices, so it's overly verbose, ugly, and superstitious (i.e., it attempts to "gracefully" handle scenarios that are impossible).
@sj_zero @leespringfield1903 Not great comparisons, for there's two lines of development here that only fully join with XP which followed Windows 2000.
The many hacks of Windows 3.0/3.1, then I moved to ground up 32 bit rewrite NT which started with a "3.1" version released to us. Windows 95 was big if only for adding a 32 bit subsystem/API from the NT line.
NT was a rough ride as corporate Microsoft degraded Cutler's work, and with NT 4 put graphics drivers inside the kernel, although I don't think that ever bit me. Still better than the mixed up 16/32 line I gather, but what I heard about Vista prompted me to move myself and one parent to Linux. Windows 8 ... I helped the other parent debug some problems with the Surface she'd bought, ugh....
@p @leespringfield1903 "Well, I can say that it has been useful as a fuzzy reference work."
Yeah, my only constant use of "AI" is the Brave Search one provided by the browser, and it's great. Sure, it hallucinates, but it always footnotes its sources so I can check them out.
I mean, Microsoft made NT, made the 9x line, ended the 9x line, and even participated in the os/2 project, and all in less time than they've had to make 8 work. If you look at it that way it looks even worse.
@sj_zero @leespringfield1903 Yeah.
A fair amount of this coincides with the Gates -> Ballmer transition. The stuff and pace you're impressed with was Gates or started under him, as well as the OS/2 work. Which had Microsoft despairing because IBM demanded it work on a 286 because they'd promised their corporate IT disciples after all the first generation PC chaos the PC-IT would be the last PC they'd have to buy for a long time.
So Microsoft continued its Windows work, which became practical with the 386, and when DEC's Ken Olsen canceled both the hardware and OS work for a RISC replacement of the VAX Microsoft took the opportunity to hire a proven OS team headed by one of the very few men who'd ever done more than one OS. Who later did foundational low level OS type work for Azure, can't keep a man like Cutler down it would seem.
Once your org chart really and truly looks like this thanks to stack ranking, it's a miracle if anything gets done, see them blowing a billion dollars on the Kin. Although the pajeet replacement might be making people nostalgic for even a botch like Windows 8??? I mean, one of the first things he did was fire most of the people who tested Windows, especially the complete experience team....