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

Head of Oracle Linux Moves to Microsoft

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 154 posts

Re: Head of Oracle Linux Moves to Microsoft

#51

Post by colejohnson66 »

SiVal wrote: post #48
therein wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah they wouldn't just toss away millions of lines of kernel code.

They've done it before, when they replaced the foundation under DOS/Win3/Win95/Win98/WinMe line with WinNT, and Apple did it when they replaced the foundation under MacOS 1-9 with NextStep and called in OS X. Apple's non-unix line endings (CR) changed to LF, their non-unix path delimiter (:) changed to /, and they were suddenly a major force among non-Apple-targeting developers who had always derided the Mac as a "to…

> Apple's non-unix line endings (CR) changed to LF...

That was because with OS X, they switched from a Mac OS subsystem to a Unix subsystem

Re: Head of Oracle Linux Moves to Microsoft

#52

Post by pjmlp »

adamnemecek wrote: post #33
bithush wrote: post #2

It would be amazing to see a Microsoft GNU/Linux distro in the future. To be honest it wouldn't exactly be hard for Microsoft to do. Take a Debian base, add whatever bits they need to make sure it works nicely in Azure, have an official Microsoft apt repo and they are done. I actually think it will happen. It makes sense for Microsoft to have an official Linux distro that they can offer true support for.

Not linux but close https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix

My first UNIX, a couple of years before GNU/Linux was even a thing.

Re: Head of Oracle Linux Moves to Microsoft

#53

Post by rodgerd »

e12e wrote: post #47

What I'm curious about: Isn't Oracle Linux mostly a joke of a copy-cat distribution? Apart from them acquiring Ksplice and possibly delaying ksplice-like functionality in SuSe and RedHat a couple of years, isn't Oracle Linux mostly just an excuse to drain Oracle users for OS license money for those that don't want to be constrained by limited hardware support in Solaris? I guess what I'm asking, why would Microsoft w…

> Isn't Oracle Linux mostly a joke of a copy-cat distribution?

Yes, it's RHEL with the serial numbers filed off.

> isn't Oracle Linux mostly just an excuse to drain Oracle users for OS license money

It's:

1/ revenge on Red Hat for buying JBoss when Larry wanted it.

2/ part of Oracle's vertical integration story.

Oracle Linux sales reps will tell you Oracle DB isn't fully supported on RHEL (i.e. they reserve the right to force you to reproduce production support problems on a rebuilt platform) and Oracle have been trailing certification on the last couple of releases of the DB on RHEL vs. OEL.

I imagine the end game Oracle are hoping for is undercutting Red Hat until they can run a hostile takeover, then shut down either the JBoss or WebLogic product lines, and generally do unto Linux what they've been doing to MySQL.

Re: Head of Oracle Linux Moves to Microsoft

#54

Post by diebir »

I highly doubt these Linux games will amount to much for Microsoft, but it's fun to watch.

Their fundamental problem is (which they realize pretty well i seems) that they have lost developer's mind share. .NET may be a fine ecosystem and C# may be a great language but in all practical senses it is Windows-only. All these Mono/open source CLR games are not even the slightest blip on the radar for a practical day-to-day backend operations running cross platform (which is mostly Linux, but Windows as well).

MS is lagging behind the Java ecosystem by 20 years. It's fun to watch them scramble and try this and that, but I suspect that the train has left the station long ago.

I think Oracle Linux has been a joke. I don't know anyone in their right mind using that. RH or CentOS, yes. Oracle Linux? Most IT professionals will pay extra to have nothing to do with Oracle. Heck, I am considering risking moving to OpenJDK, just so I have nothing of Oracle in sight.

Re: Head of Oracle Linux Moves to Microsoft

#55

Post by Spooky23 »

diskcat wrote: post #3
bithush wrote: post #2

It would be amazing to see a Microsoft GNU/Linux distro in the future. To be honest it wouldn't exactly be hard for Microsoft to do. Take a Debian base, add whatever bits they need to make sure it works nicely in Azure, have an official Microsoft apt repo and they are done. I actually think it will happen. It makes sense for Microsoft to have an official Linux distro that they can offer true support for.

What would be the point of using microsoft's linux?

Licensing on HyperV.

Red Hat subscriptions require that you license by socket, effectively doubling the cost for licensing on a per server basis.

If you were using Microsoft Linux, you could potentially ditch VMWare and RHEL costs.

Re: Head of Oracle Linux Moves to Microsoft

#56

Post by MichaelGG »

diebir wrote: post #54

I highly doubt these Linux games will amount to much for Microsoft, but it's fun to watch. Their fundamental problem is (which they realize pretty well i seems) that they have lost developer's mind share. .NET may be a fine ecosystem and C# may be a great language but in all practical senses it is Windows-only. All these Mono/open source CLR games are not even the slightest blip on the radar for a practical day-to-da…

With MS supporting CLR on Linux, I don't see what the problem is. They now have a limited IDE and runtime support for cross-platform.

FWIW I've used Mono in production on Linux in telecom, and it's handled many billions of messages over the years. With F# nonetheless. Apart from a few rare issues here and there it's been a great experience.

Re: Head of Oracle Linux Moves to Microsoft

#57

Post by Spooky23 »

marcosdumay wrote: post #26
revelation wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same as using a lot of the other Microsoft stuff: you can pay and have someone fix $problem on a deterministic timescale. You can upgrade without having to fear your production system will come crashing down.

> you can pay and have someone fix $problem on a deterministic timescale Really? When did MS start fixing bugs for their paying customers in a deterministic timescale? The point about upgrades may be good, but MS has started breaking things on update recently too.

For years.

You open up a crit sit that is tagged as a product defect and they will turn fixes around quickly.

If you are strategic to them, they'll fly in people.

Re: Head of Oracle Linux Moves to Microsoft

#58

Post by zxcvcxz »

bithush wrote: post #12
matt_wulfeck wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taking back market share from Mac users. Especially among developers.

This. I would be very interested in running Microsoft Linux instead of Ubuntu on a physical dev box. With .NET Core, ASP.NET, etc. having an MS proper Linux would be great. Something along the lines of "We officially support development with ASP.NET, .NET Core, Mono, etc. on Microsoft Linux for deployment to Azure Microsoft Linux instances".

>having an MS proper Linux would be great.

What you're describing will never happen. MS wants to keep .NET/etc development easiest on Windows. They have no incentive or plans to deliver the same support for developers on Linux as they do for devs on Windows.

Any true "linux distro" released by MS will have gimped out tools. If they ship windows with a Linux ABI ("Ubuntu + Windows") so you have MS support, then it's never going to be proper Linux.

I don't see how anything MS is doing really helps Linux. If they were really pro-Linux they'd make a commitment to supporting it 100% by making 100% of their development software compatible with Linux.

Just more extending for the purpose of extinguishing. I have no reason to believe otherwise because MS has not inspired confidence in me. All the tools they've open sourced or released on Linux are half assed. A billion dollar company like MS can make good software for Linux that isn't gimped, they just choose not to do so because they prefer that Windows remains a more viable platform for people who use their tools.

Re: Head of Oracle Linux Moves to Microsoft

#59

Post by Spooky23 »

diebir wrote: post #54

I highly doubt these Linux games will amount to much for Microsoft, but it's fun to watch. Their fundamental problem is (which they realize pretty well i seems) that they have lost developer's mind share. .NET may be a fine ecosystem and C# may be a great language but in all practical senses it is Windows-only. All these Mono/open source CLR games are not even the slightest blip on the radar for a practical day-to-da…

Oracle doesn't care what you think at all, good or bad. If you hate them, they undermine you by making you sound like a bumpkin. If you love them, they undermine you by using you as a spy.

They influence your CEO/CIO/board/governor/mayor/general/owner/investor. A few years back, they convinced some dope in the State of California to buy a named user license for every resident of the state.

Re: Head of Oracle Linux Moves to Microsoft

#60

Post by merb »

hollander wrote: post #14
diskcat wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would be the point of using microsoft's linux?

> What would be the point of using microsoft's linux? Azure. It will be like Amazon Linux, which is based on Fedora if I'm correct. I wonder what Microsoft will use, and if they choose Debian, if the Debian project will profit from it. Furthermore, they will want better support for Ubuntu on Windows. If people don't need an Ubuntu machine to run Linux, without having to mess with Virtualbox, that will keep more peopl…

Amazon Linux is based of CentOS 5.
Post reply on HN