I dont believe Joyent has vested interests in Node.js, even though they are supporting the project. They are running a cloud hosting service (and my joyent servers don't even have node.js installed).
I think everyone is overreacting to this announcement, they are just lending a hand with IOCP to Ryan as he finishes up his abstraction layer in 0.5.x. Just like they denoted some offifical resources to PHP, Ruby, Python, jQuery etc..
For me, it's more the fact that MS have officially acknowledged the existence of node.js within a windows platform that matters, rather than any particular work they may or may not be doing.
Yeah that makes sense, the 43 media reports out there at the moment are just silly, if you look at github the abstraction layer introduced in 0.5 was pretty far along, bringing on some inside help is obviously a good thing but FFS lets no overdrama this.
It's and apples and oranges comparison though. For those that like their acronyms, Amazon's service is infrastructure (IaaS) whereas Azure abstracts more aware providing a platfrom to build on (PaaS)
Though they advertise & promote Azure as PaaS, you can actually use it for IaaS. They offer a Virtual Machine role which is the rough equivalent of an EC2 instance. I think most folks go the PaaS route though.
Very true. It is my understanding though that the primary use case of the VM role is to allow legacy applications to sit in the cloud without needing to rebuild for the Azure platform.
VMRole still isnt IaaS, since it doesn't have the equivalent of EC2's EBS backed instance storage. The Azure drive is close, but still not the same. So if you need persistence on the instance storage, you'll still have issues.
I didn't use it, but I recall that some years ago, MS's JScript was considered by some to be quite useful -- until the divergences became an issue and/or MS whacked it in favor of pushing VBScript or whatever.
MS has a history with JS beyond just annoying people with IE.
Given MSFT's history of doing their own thing rather than supporting the community alternative, this seems like a really strange decision; particularly as they have the potential to build a great competitor product using .net async features (http://lorgonblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/28/f-async-on-the-se...).
Building JScript in parallel to JavaScript back in the 90s was a dumb idea, but forgoing their own toolset to support node.js is equally misguided. They should concentrate on educating .net developers on how to compete with the non-msft development community using the .net platform to bring them to productivity / toolset parity, and fostering open-source .net projects.
18 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 49.4 ms ] threadMy only worry is that hopefully MS won't take it, customise it heavily, and we end up with two competing, slightly incompatible implementations.
Be strong, Joyent.
http://www.joyentcloud.com/products/smart-appliances/
(Azure is extremely expensive compared to say EC2 feature-wise).
I hear it's coming though.
My company uses IaaS to develop SaaS platforms or are they PaaS. Hmm. Sounds like bullshit.
I'd love to see a Venn diagram that actually defines these marketing terms.
IMHO computers is computers.
MS has a history with JS beyond just annoying people with IE.
Building JScript in parallel to JavaScript back in the 90s was a dumb idea, but forgoing their own toolset to support node.js is equally misguided. They should concentrate on educating .net developers on how to compete with the non-msft development community using the .net platform to bring them to productivity / toolset parity, and fostering open-source .net projects.