miffy900
Joined 12 years ago
Joined 12 years ago
I recall installing the WinFS beta 1 release and suddenly the winfs-related background processes were eating up 150MB+ of RAM at a minimum, even with no stores created or files indexed - when machines back in 2005 had 512MB of memory that's actually a lot for what is supposed to be a background service.
Windows XP back then only needed 128MB of ram to run. they made a mistake in not building it on top of something akin to sqlite - hell they could've implemented maybe 70% of what they shipped in beta 1 with just sqlite alone.
Vista definitely had that out of the box; Windows 7 perfected the search functionality - specifically it ended up performing faster than Vista. then windows 8 had to ruin it, and windows 10 never recovered - MS seemingly forgot what a good local search experience was after that.
This leak seems incredibly mundane. customers would have the security engine installed, but not the console.
if I say 'this Apple M5 chip is 3x faster' than this intel chip, it implies two things:
- the run time of most operations that runs on it is now reduced (so one quantity is smaller)
- but also: MORE WORK is being completed per unit of time compared to the intel chip (so this quantity is greater)
So yes, a greater quantity is being measured in the apple chip compared to the intel when you say apple is N times faster. i guess this a quirk with the word 'faster' - it actually measures two things, time and work performed per unit of time. the word smaller just measures size.
like, if I give a customer a cup of coffee one day, then give them a SMALLER cup of coffee the next day, for the same price, but declare "It's now 2X more space efficient!" i.e. it's now half the size, I'm certain the customer is gonna be pissed.
I keep seeing this being used when people talk about efficiency or performance gains and it's just very unintuitive language.
> BuildXL has also been proven to scale to large codebases (e.g., Windows/Office repositories) where builds can consist of millions of processes with terabytes of outputs
BuildXL is also NOT compatible with VS and they have no plans to make it so. from the readme in the repo: https://github.com/microsoft/BuildXL
> There are currently no plans to integrate it into Visual Studio.
for contrast, Elon paid $44b for twitter back in 2022. When you adjust for inflation, Twitter was acquired for $49b in 2026 money. Cursor getting bought for 1.22x more is just insanity.
Elon seems unwilling to shake off the image that he has basically no idea what he's doing.
I wanted to try using a native language other than C++ and Swift ostensibly seemed easier to pick up. I continue to use Swift for iOS app development though where it is much easier to use; but that has its own share of compromises and trade-offs - but not centred around Swift, around SwiftUI vs UIKit.
And this was me trying to use Swift for a data access layer + backend web API. There's barely any guidance or existing knowledge on using Swift for backend APIs, let alone a web browser of all projects.
There's no precedent or existing implementation you can look at for reference; known best practices in Swift are geared almost entirely towards using it with Apple platform APIs, so tons of knowledge about using the language itself simply cannot be applied outside the domain of building client-running apps for Apple hardware.
To use swift outside its usual domain is to become a pioneer, and try something truly untested. It was always a longshot.
What matters here is if this `wordcraft` app gets serious widespread use and businesses (which is Microsoft's main revenue source) start using this in favour of MS Word. Then I'd say anything's possible and testing in court whether LLM-vibecoded reverse engineered-apps actually do infringe on IP-rights is something Microsoft would be willing to risk to protect their greater Office 365 subscription revenue. This is one of those actual slipery slope scenarios - first Word, then Powerpoint, then Excel, then maybe even the more niche apps like Visio, or Access or Project.
As it's reverse engineered, I wonder if copyrights even apply? It's likely Microsoft would assert its patent rights.
But firstly why would a business that depends on Word to the point they pay Microsoft for it,want to even move to a vibe-coded alternative anyway? The support you get from Microsoft is very different from an open source app, to the point many Word users wouldn't even know what Github is, let alone even know how to raise an issue there to get help.
The 'threat' this wordcraft project poses, I think is very minimal even in the long run, to Microsoft.
But side note: why even bother reverse engineering Word? The file format is very well specified - I think I've used at least 4 Word alternatives, and once wrote a basic C# app that could read and render most docx files, using the official Office Open XML SDK (https://github.com/dotnet/Open-XML-SDK).
There's tons of documentation on how to parse DOCX files, so of all the apps to reverse engineer this seems to be the most redundant one. Why bother recreating Word? Why not just build a better writing app that just so happens to save its data to docx? Indeed, they probably started with Word because it was probably the easiest to verify considering many other, independent implementations of the DOCX file format exist.
This whole effort seems very 'unthinking' - it's seems to be more of a 'because I can!' type of project rather than a genuine effort to improve the state of things with old-school word processing, which is one of those silently-operating-in-the-background type of jobs that is still very prevalent in a lot of industries, like the legal sector.
I would love to get multiple typing cursors in Word, similar to VSCode and the Ctrl+Alt+Up/Down arrow shortcut, but then if Word doesn't already have it, then this project won't implement it either because it's a mindless, carbon copy. Why bother being just a follower? Why not start adding features Word doesn't have? As someone who has to deal with 1. users of Word and 2. the outputs of Word a lot I don't see this going anywhere unless it starts actually innovating.