Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS

theregister.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 192 posts

Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS

#61

Post by greedo »

rwmj wrote: post #33
rottyguy wrote: post #13

Earlier 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.

This always pops up when we have audits performed; Solutionary in particular seems to just go by version number with ssh, and doesn't seem to recognize that RHEL has backported numerous fixes into it's RPMs.

Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS

#62

Post by buffoon »

kyberias wrote: post #59
buffoon wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

"Have moved off to Windows Server AppFabric" Doesn't really sound you know what you're talking about. That technology is dead and doesn't really replace BizTalk. "In April 2015 Microsoft announced that it will end support for AppFabric for Windows Server on the 2nd April 2016."

I know exactly what I'm talking about and am aware of the deprecation. I'm talking historically i.e. when people wanted managed long-running workflow hosting, monitoring and WCF correlation on the cheap instead of fishing out for Biztalk orchestration style integrations and licenses they jumped on that bandwagon.

People are stuck with it now, deprecation or not.

Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS

#63

Post by th0br0 »

rottyguy wrote: post #39
rwmj wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/...

Uhm, ... packages don't always have the same names on all distributions!

i.e. "libunwind8" translates to libunwind, unzip to unzip and libssl-dev to openssl-devel. libunwind's from EPEL though...

Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS

#64

Post by caskance »

DanBC wrote: post #38
noir_lord wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 p…

GPL is cancer, but in a good way.

Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS

#65

Post by rwmj »

th0br0 wrote: post #63
rottyguy wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/...

Uhm, ... packages don't always have the same names on all distributions! i.e. "libunwind8" translates to libunwind, unzip to unzip and libssl-dev to openssl-devel. libunwind's from EPEL though...

Looks like we'll be adding libunwind as a new package in RHEL 7.2. (There's a BZ, but for some reason I can't really fathom it is marked as private, and it's above my salary scale to open private bugs, sorry)

Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS

#66

Post by artmageddon »

x5n1 wrote: post #35
merb wrote: post #14

Sooner 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.

How so?

Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS

#67

Post by rsl7 »

osullivj wrote: post #3

People forget that MS used to have it's own Unix in the 80s: Xenix. I ported a large DEC PDP Fortran codebase to run on Xenix back then - it was far too big to fit in the 640K DOS limit. Writing the Xenix device driver for the 68000 powered graphics card in the PC was fun.

Used that on a Sequent Symmetry at Purdue in the early 90s

Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS

#68

Post by buffoon »

Kurtz79 wrote: post #47
junto wrote: post #2

Microsoft 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…

"How long until they decide that Windows Server is no longer worth investing in ?" Without hard data to support it, my impression (or better, my anecdotal experience) is that Windows Server has quite a strong hold in medium/large sized companies (not necessarily IT companies) as part of the local network infrastructure, and it's quite profitable for Microsoft.

I think it's treated as a necessary evil. People are starting to realise that it's less necessary these days.

Anecdotally, back a decade ago it was common to see a Windows 2000/2003/SBS box in even an SME environment being a fileserver/exchange/intranet/AD box. Now, I rarely see one. In fact they're declining even in large corps.

Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS

#69

Post by nitinics »

More than just an OS, I think what they've built is a Network OS (NOS) on top of Linux. They have been involved in Switch Abstraction Interface(SAI) specifications from Open Compute Networking Projects from early days. I am excited what this brings on the table in Software Defined Networking. I really hope they open source their SAI implementation, and their NOS can be used with ONIE. So I could get a bare metal switch, install their NOS, and build network apps for my use-cases.

Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS

#70

Post by ChrisArgyle »

drnewman wrote: post #24

Don'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 couldn't disargee more about Microsoft's current place in tech markets. They've lost quite a lot of weight since their 800lb gorilla days in the 90s.

They used to exploit their dominant market position to replace de-facto standards with their own: kerberos "extensions", creating ActiveX instead of just implementing NPAPI, removing JNI from the MS JVM. But they can't do that any more. They lost too much ground under Ballmer.

Now they're nearly tripping over themselves promoting their cross-platform tolerance. Run Linux in our cloud! Run our apps on all the platforms! Sync/connect our apps/devices to any service!

Source: Age 34, started with Linux in '97 (Slackware 3.2)

Post reply on HN