It's kind of a debatable scenario. In simple terms, Source code of VSCode is open source, But compiled binaries provided by microsoft is not. So if you want a true open source edition, you can compile the source code yourself. Or you can use a community compiled distribution like vscodium. Only bad stuff is that they have final control of project, So if community want to add a feature which are not in their interest, they can be an authoritive roadblock on the PR. Visa-versa, if there is a feature which they like, they will add it, irrespective wether community want's it or not.
It's bad but it's very common scenerio. Chromium is open source but google chrome is not. But marketing team of those companies love the twist of terminology. And google has final control of the project itself, so screw adblockers, If you want one, good luck maintaining your own fork.
It's even worst for android. The project and base code is open, android OS is not. But if you try to compile the OS yourself, you can't because there are hard dependencies on google services, without which the OS won't be functional. And those services are licensed. There are a few open source alternatives like gapps, but recently google want's you to get a certification key from them if you want to use those alternatives on a real hardware. Similar to how microsoft want to provide UEFI keys for linux distros.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
It's kind of a debatable scenario. In simple terms, Source code of VSCode is open source, But compiled binaries provided by microsoft is not. So if you want a true open source edition, you can compile the source code yourself. Or you can use a community compiled distribution like vscodium. Only bad stuff is that they have final control of project, So if community want to add a feature which are not in their interest, they can be an authoritive roadblock on the PR. Visa-versa, if there is a feature which they like, they will add it, irrespective wether community want's it or not.
It's bad but it's very common scenerio. Chromium is open source but google chrome is not. But marketing team of those companies love the twist of terminology. And google has final control of the project itself, so screw adblockers, If you want one, good luck maintaining your own fork.
It's even worst for android. The project and base code is open, android OS is not. But if you try to compile the OS yourself, you can't because there are hard dependencies on google services, without which the OS won't be functional. And those services are licensed. There are a few open source alternatives like gapps, but recently google want's you to get a certification key from them if you want to use those alternatives on a real hardware. Similar to how microsoft want to provide UEFI keys for linux distros.