They should call it Microsoft Linux NT. The NT could stand for 'Network Technology'.
Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
31–40 of 192 posts
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#32Microsoft are now moving quickly to allow users to run .NET on all platforms. How long until they decide that Windows Server is no longer worth investing in? Or are there too many Microsoft server products earning good profits (i.e. Exchange and BizTalk), to make that switch a realistic future expectation? I'm genuinely interested to hear people's opinions on their thoughts of the future of Microsoft and Windows Serv…
Heavy Windows server user here. We have 100+ windows server 2008 R2 and 2012 R2 machines in production and a massive .Net/C# codebase. Currently it's a complete bastard of an operating system. It's expensive, hard to manage even with powershell and DSC etc, difficult to update, difficult to provision, complicated and to be honest absolutely terrible licensing hell that costs us days a year. Hyper-V just adds complexi…
> Microsoft I suspect will end up a services company like Google with some hardware being sold on the side. And you know what? That's fine.
This seems to be one of the patterns for large enterprise software companies, IBM did it as well.
It would be interesting to see what Microsoft could do with Linux on the desktop if they swung their weight behind it, Microsoft has incredible engineering resources and some amazing programmers, I doubt it would happen but it would be fascinating.
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#33Microsoft are now moving quickly to allow users to run .NET on all platforms. How long until they decide that Windows Server is no longer worth investing in? Or are there too many Microsoft server products earning good profits (i.e. Exchange and BizTalk), to make that switch a realistic future expectation? I'm genuinely interested to hear people's opinions on their thoughts of the future of Microsoft and Windows Serv…
I'm currently in my first nix job after years with Windows. It's a larger company (15k+ people) and using RedHat for it's linux solution (solaris/aix is also present). Honestly, I don't understand the $$$ argument at the enterprise level against msoft. Not only are you paying Redhat for support but their RPMs are about a year behind what's out there (that's a lot of time!). I'm trying to get .net (coreclr) compiled n…
If you're comparing Red Hat RPM's version numbers, then don't. Red Hat works by backporting features and fixes on top of the old versions, precisely so customers don't need to upgrade to new major versions so often.
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#34Don't know anyone's ages here, but is anyone fascinated by the historical implications of this? I started using Linux in the 90's and the talk in the community at the time was "world domination". It seems to me that's happened--more or less behind the scenes, but it's happened.
I'm 35, started using Linux in '97 so I've been around for most of the history. It's quite amazing how Microsoft has changed in that time tbh from "Embrace, Extinguish, Extend" and all the shenanigans they pulled with comparing Win2k vs Linux/Samba and the halloween memo through to submitting code to the kernel, using Linux as a guest in their VM stuff and now using it internally not to mention making .Net a first cl…
They don't have a choice. Linux has already won. Heard of Android? Yeah that's the Linux kernel right there, over a billion mobile devices. Heard of Mac OS? That's a Unix kernel right there. Microsoft makes a proprietary operating system with cumbersome licensing restrictions. Microsoft is 10 years from death if it does not embrace Linux.
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#35Sooner or later Microsoft will just build his GUI on Top of Linux and sell that or sell the support like Redhat. That would mean a lot to the computing World. When .NET runs on more Devices they could just port more and more compatibility.
Yes except Microsoft's stewardship of .NET is lacking too.
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#36Microsoft are now moving quickly to allow users to run .NET on all platforms. How long until they decide that Windows Server is no longer worth investing in? Or are there too many Microsoft server products earning good profits (i.e. Exchange and BizTalk), to make that switch a realistic future expectation? I'm genuinely interested to hear people's opinions on their thoughts of the future of Microsoft and Windows Serv…
Heavy Windows server user here. We have 100+ windows server 2008 R2 and 2012 R2 machines in production and a massive .Net/C# codebase. Currently it's a complete bastard of an operating system. It's expensive, hard to manage even with powershell and DSC etc, difficult to update, difficult to provision, complicated and to be honest absolutely terrible licensing hell that costs us days a year. Hyper-V just adds complexi…
Which begs the question which CIO made that technology choice? He should be fired!
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#37Don't know anyone's ages here, but is anyone fascinated by the historical implications of this? I started using Linux in the 90's and the talk in the community at the time was "world domination". It seems to me that's happened--more or less behind the scenes, but it's happened.
I'm 29, started using Linux in 2003 when I just bought my first PC.
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#38Don't know anyone's ages here, but is anyone fascinated by the historical implications of this? I started using Linux in the 90's and the talk in the community at the time was "world domination". It seems to me that's happened--more or less behind the scenes, but it's happened.
I'm 35, started using Linux in '97 so I've been around for most of the history. It's quite amazing how Microsoft has changed in that time tbh from "Embrace, Extinguish, Extend" and all the shenanigans they pulled with comparing Win2k vs Linux/Samba and the halloween memo through to submitting code to the kernel, using Linux as a guest in their VM stuff and now using it internally not to mention making .Net a first cl…
MS used to really trash open source, with Ballmer calling GPL "cancer". (Although the company pulled back from that extreme).
When MS took over Hotmail they got rid of FreeBSD that was running it.
But MS have used Unix for years. They released MS IE for Unix. (The only person I know who ever used it was on HN.) Perhaps more bizarre was the Windows Media Player for Unix. Their TCP/IP stack was from BSD for ages (and possibly other stuff. The EULA used to refer to the regents of Berkley.)
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm currently in my first nix job after years with Windows. It's a larger company (15k+ people) and using RedHat for it's linux solution (solaris/aix is also present). Honestly, I don't understand the $$$ argument at the enterprise level against msoft. Not only are you paying Redhat for support but their RPMs are about a year behind what's out there (that's a lot of time!). I'm trying to get .net (coreclr) compiled n…
If you're comparing Red Hat RPM's version numbers, then don't. Red Hat works by backporting features and fixes on top of the old versions, precisely so customers don't need to upgrade to new major versions so often.
Well that makes it more complicated. Any idea how I would be able to find these packages (specifically: libunwind8, libssl-dev and unzip)
https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/blob/master/Documentation/...