5 ms·

I’m not sure the term has ever been applied to Microsoft’s own products…

dkarl 4y ago
They embrace, extend, and extinguish products they don't make money on, so that people are forced to use products that they do make money on.
- IncRnd 4y ago
  Microsoft doesn't make money from VS Code. Atom was retired due to a lack of activity with the project. I've never even seen anyone use Atom, since the time it was released 8 years ago.
  - wiseowise 4y ago
    > Microsoft doesn't make money from VS Code. They harvest an astonishing amount of data from it.
  - dkarl 4y ago
    Hence the parent comment: > We should be counting down the days till they sunset VS Code to focus on VS Code "Pro". I don't think it would serve their interests, so I'm not worried about it, but who knows? This cynicism is directed towards Microsoft because they've earned it.
  - HideousKojima 4y ago
    Had two coworkers at my last job use it when they needed to edit some of our legacy PHP stuff (we were mostly a .NET shop) but even they switched to VS Code eventually because the writing was on the wall for support.
civilized 4y ago
Atom was developed before the acquisition. Which brings us to the second proud tradition of the tech titans, acquiring companies to end the products the acquirer doesn't like.
- babypuncher 4y ago
  Does Microsoft not "like" Atom, or has its market share dwindled to the point that it is no longer worth maintaining?
  - vchuravy 4y ago
    If you look at the contribution activity it dropped off after acquisition of GitHub by Microsoft and it seems that development was redirected to VSCode. The writing was on the wall for a long while now, and was one of the reasons why the JuliaCommunity stopped advocating Juno/Atom as a platform and instead switched to VSCode
  - jonwest 4y ago
    Probably a bit of both if I was to hazard a guess. MS has VS Code, which is definitely the elephant in the room as far as go to IDEs in the environments I’ve been in lately. So right now they’re spending engineering time on both VS Code and Atom, so they may as well focus their resources on the more popular one.
- rob74 4y ago
  Well yeah, if you have two very similar products (editors/IDEs based on web technology), one of them much more successful than the other, putting a lot of effort into the less-used product sounds a bit hard to justify...
- wiseowise 4y ago
  > Which brings us to the second proud tradition of the tech titans, acquiring companies to end the products the acquirer doesn't like. Atom is inferior in every aspect to Visual Studio Code. Atom was on life support for too long.
- Beltalowda 4y ago
  Look at the Atom repo, very few commits in the last year, and it's not like there are loads of open pull requests (serious PRs do get merged), and it's been strongly dropping off for a long time. It's the programming community that abandoned Atom, not Microsoft.
lijogdfljk 4y ago
But Atom isn't, is it? It was started prior to Microsoft, to which Microsoft bought Github, and are now "sunsetting". While i don't think Atom was enough competition to actually warrant any real discussion here, the timeline seems quite fitting to EEE no?

They embrace, extend, and extinguish products they don't make money on, so that people are forced to use products that they do make money on.

IncRnd 4y ago
Microsoft doesn't make money from VS Code. Atom was retired due to a lack of activity with the project. I've never even seen anyone use Atom, since the time it was released 8 years ago.
- wiseowise 4y ago
  > Microsoft doesn't make money from VS Code. They harvest an astonishing amount of data from it.
- dkarl 4y ago
  Hence the parent comment: > We should be counting down the days till they sunset VS Code to focus on VS Code "Pro". I don't think it would serve their interests, so I'm not worried about it, but who knows? This cynicism is directed towards Microsoft because they've earned it.
- HideousKojima 4y ago
  Had two coworkers at my last job use it when they needed to edit some of our legacy PHP stuff (we were mostly a .NET shop) but even they switched to VS Code eventually because the writing was on the wall for support.

civilized 4y ago

Atom was developed before the acquisition. Which brings us to the second proud tradition of the tech titans, acquiring companies to end the products the acquirer doesn't like.

babypuncher 4y ago
Does Microsoft not "like" Atom, or has its market share dwindled to the point that it is no longer worth maintaining?
- vchuravy 4y ago
  If you look at the contribution activity it dropped off after acquisition of GitHub by Microsoft and it seems that development was redirected to VSCode. The writing was on the wall for a long while now, and was one of the reasons why the JuliaCommunity stopped advocating Juno/Atom as a platform and instead switched to VSCode
- jonwest 4y ago
  Probably a bit of both if I was to hazard a guess. MS has VS Code, which is definitely the elephant in the room as far as go to IDEs in the environments I’ve been in lately. So right now they’re spending engineering time on both VS Code and Atom, so they may as well focus their resources on the more popular one.
rob74 4y ago
Well yeah, if you have two very similar products (editors/IDEs based on web technology), one of them much more successful than the other, putting a lot of effort into the less-used product sounds a bit hard to justify...
wiseowise 4y ago
> Which brings us to the second proud tradition of the tech titans, acquiring companies to end the products the acquirer doesn't like. Atom is inferior in every aspect to Visual Studio Code. Atom was on life support for too long.
Beltalowda 4y ago
Look at the Atom repo, very few commits in the last year, and it's not like there are loads of open pull requests (serious PRs do get merged), and it's been strongly dropping off for a long time. It's the programming community that abandoned Atom, not Microsoft.

lijogdfljk 4y ago

But Atom isn't, is it? It was started prior to Microsoft, to which Microsoft bought Github, and are now "sunsetting". While i don't think Atom was enough competition to actually warrant any real discussion here, the timeline seems quite fitting to EEE no?