That's a funny point of view. Windows is made by a multi-billion dollar company, rented by countless wealthy software development shops, but it's volunteer open-source programmers who are supposed to take on the burden of supporting it? Seriously, I can't even comprehend that thought process.
I write software for fun, I release it on github, and some people find it useful. If there are other people who don't, they can improve it for their own purposes, or they can find or write something better. I don't think anybody has a right to expect me to support Microsoft's product. That's insane.
I don't think anybody has a right to expect me to support Microsoft's product. That's insane.
True enough, though it's also fair to consider a language/platform/ecosystem inferior for some work if it relies on that kind of individual and often less portable contribution for its effectiveness. A lot of FOSS advocates will promote community support and a broad contributor base as advantages of that style of development, but there is another side to that coin, which is that sometimes you get just what you (didn't) pay for and you're on your own in terms of support or working around any problems.
I write software for fun, I release it on github, and some people find it useful. If there are other people who don't, they can improve it for their own purposes, or they can find or write something better. I don't think anybody has a right to expect me to support Microsoft's product. That's insane.