Hacker News Reader

Comment by NewsaHackO | Hacker News Reader

Not really though, this seems like it was Cursors fault from the get go.

Don’t know about you, but personally I want the extensions I create to be available widely. The fact that vs code market place is used as an easy place for me to distribute it only to limit the reach based on the business needs of Microsoft sure does feel like being embraced extended in the attempt of extinguishing usecases that I do in fact support.

Can’t fault cursor for letting people install extensions when most of those, if not all of those, developers want their extensions on cursor.

This is about closed-source extensions created by Microsoft, and those always had strings attached which Cursor apparently ignored.

I would rather ask Cursor why they decided to fork VSCode when they could simply have written yet another VSCode extension to provide the same functionality. Seems shady AF tbh.

Doesn’t Microsoft handicap extensions by not giving them the full access that co-pilot gets? You’d be crazy to compete when the other side literally owns the platform.

Why is it shady to fork an open-source project? If they didn't want forks they should have released it under a non-open-source license.

They couldn't have done and it gets tiresome to repeat the technical limitations on extensions for vscode again and again (which don't apply to Microsoft owned extensions like Github Copilot) when you can google it yourself.

Continue and several other extensions do what Cursor does and they're extensions. No excuses from Cursor are acceptable.

Perhaps. But I'm sure Microsoft releasing Agent mode at the same time is not a coincidence.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com