Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member • Hacker News Board

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#131

Post by WorldMaker » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 7:32 PM UTC

hueving wrote: post #119

tn13 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> being a platinum member entails donating $500k The important thing about this news is not the title or the amount. The important thing to notice that Microsoft has moved from extreme hostility to active co-operation with general Linux community. This is a good move and it benefits Linux community lot more than Microsoft. I always felt that it was needless to paint MS/Linux as some kind of zero some game to begin wi…

How does this benefit the Linux community even more? Microsofts move to include shells and a kernel compatible with Unix may end up being one of the most damaging things to Linux in a long time. All of the casual users that don't care about open source will just give in and use Windows as their OS when they hit a driver snag or something since they still get the userspace tools they like.

Which is what "casual users" have been doing with macOS for a while now: getting some of the BSD userspace tools they like in a friendlier overall OS package.

If anything Microsoft is providing a way to encourage Windows users that would never touch a BSD or Linux userspace tool to give it a try. That's a possible way to bring new users to Linux: teach them how to do things with Linux userspace tools and encourage them to dive deeper until they can do everything they want with Linux userspace tools and then maybe encourage them to switch.

If anything, Microsoft has given the Linux community the keys to possibly embrace some "casual users" that otherwise never would have explored Linux.

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#132

Post by tener » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 7:35 PM UTC

Analemma_ wrote: post #121

nitrogen wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Half the HN frontpage right now is MS articles. Seems oddly coincidental. We can't forget about the bad MS is still doing: forced Win10 upgrades, Win10 spyware, Android patent extortion, FAT/VFAT/exFAT patent suits and licenses, etc. The developer arm seems to be working hard, which is commendable. But looking at the rest of the org, this just seems like another Embrace round of the EEE cycle.

It's not "oddly coincidental", it's Microsoft's developer conference today, which is where the announcement was made. During WWDC and I/O the front page is filled with Apple and Google news too.

Comparing to Apple, Microsoft seems to be getting more attention to their news, which is a praiseworthy change.

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#133

Post by baybal2 » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 7:37 PM UTC

nitrogen wrote: post #117

bomdo wrote: post #20

Apparently, being a platinum member entails donating $500k [1], so it's not that big a deal for Microsoft ($85B revenue[2]). And as the article states, there has been negativity in the linux community regarding the old arch-enemy joining their ranks. Looking at the new Microsoft however, I think it's fair to assume that the days of "embrace, extend and extinguish"[3] are over and they are genuinely interested in coop…

Half the HN frontpage right now is MS articles. Seems oddly coincidental. We can't forget about the bad MS is still doing: forced Win10 upgrades, Win10 spyware, Android patent extortion, FAT/VFAT/exFAT patent suits and licenses, etc. The developer arm seems to be working hard, which is commendable. But looking at the rest of the org, this just seems like another Embrace round of the EEE cycle.

Let's wait for Linux Millenium Edition

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#134

Post by jen20 » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 7:37 PM UTC

bisby wrote: post #126

cyphar wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (1) That's hair splitting of common usage. The operating system's technical name is GNU/Linux[1]. Many people call it Linux incorrectly, but it is actually a serious distinction[2]. I would agree however that Linux is the most widely used OS kernel. To make the distinction more obvious, can you explain what the difference is between "Linux" and Android (which uses the Linux kernel). [ Hint: the difference is that A…

Alpine doesn't use GNU by default. And it would fit into what I call "Linux". The "operating system" is not "technically" "GNU/Linux" - that's just what Richard Stallman wants it to be. Stallman wants the definition of "operating system" to be the fully usable system. In which case Linux won't work. You need GNU coreutils. But you need a lot of other things too, why are the other things omitted from the naming? Windo…

Stallman's definition is correct. The operating system for everyone else includes the userland and libc. Luckily this is what made LX and the Windows equivalent possible, though.

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#135

Post by fetbaffe » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 7:38 PM UTC

andyjohnson0 wrote: post #39

ss248 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get why people downvote this post. It's like everyone completely forgot about Halloween documents[1]. We should be very careful with Microsoft. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_documents

That was 1998. Eighteen years ago.

Obligatory: "Microsoft killed my Pappy" http://www.hanselman.com/blog/MicrosoftKilledMyPappy.aspx

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#136

Post by chtfn » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 7:41 PM UTC

astrodust wrote: post #127

executesorder66 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's a huge assumption. There's no real indication that people would stop using Windows if Office existed in Linux. Except for basically every thread I've seen about switching to Linux, where people say the only reason they won't switch is because they still want to use Office and Photoshop. >If that were the case, then porting Office to OS X would've had a similar effect, don't you think? No. Cost is a major rea…

> Cost is a major reason people don't switch to OS X. Cost is a lot more than the physical machine. This is why Linux machines while technically less expensive (no OS license) are actually more expensive in terms of support. Until that nut can be cracked it's hard to get wide-scale adoption (e.g. 50% deskops vs. 5%).

Do you have a reliable ref for the cost comparison?

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#137

Post by acd » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 7:42 PM UTC

Microsoft are doing good by supporting Linux and shipping Ubuntu as an option in Windows 10 which is good for developers. In the past Microsoft has released a UNIX based operating system called Xenix and there has also been a subsystem for Unix in previous Windows NT versions.

Windows subsystem for Linux https://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2016/07/22/fun-with-t...

Xenix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix

Microsoft Interix, Windows services for Unix historic link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interix

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#138

Post by chipperyman573 » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 7:43 PM UTC

sterex wrote: post #79

So a person buying a Windows license is indirectly paying for my Linux usage? Interesting!

Microsoft has $85B of revenue[0] and joining as a platinum member costs $500k. Even if Windows licences are the only ways Microsoft makes money (they're not, by a longshot), every copy would only account for 0.000008% of the donation.

[0]: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/Investor/earnings/FY-2016-Q4...

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#139

Post by tw04 » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 7:45 PM UTC

zanny wrote: post #114

tw04 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So Redhat is hostile towards Linux too then, right? Because if they weren't, they wouldn't push their competing products against Canonical or Suse. Just because companies release competing, incompatible products, doesn't mean they're "hostile" towards one another.

Redhat is not pushing developers into producing software incompatible with anything but their own system. They are actively involved in the development of almost all core software common to all distros, and even flatpak, which is meant to tear down barriers between distro package formats rather than prop up the wall. Microsoft could push Windows all they want if they were not also pushing an ecosystem exclusive to th…

Oh... ok. So because Redhat makes some products that ONLY work on Linux, and are interchangeable between a few distros (although not the supported paid-for versions), you get "real choice".

What's my choice if I'm an AIX user, or a Solaris user, or an HPUX user, or a Windows user, or a FreeBSD user? My choice is to switch operating systems? Sort of like the choice MS provides?

Re: Microsoft Becomes Linux Foundation Platinum Member

#140

Post by astrodust » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 7:45 PM UTC

chtfn wrote: post #136

astrodust wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cost is a major reason people don't switch to OS X. Cost is a lot more than the physical machine. This is why Linux machines while technically less expensive (no OS license) are actually more expensive in terms of support. Until that nut can be cracked it's hard to get wide-scale adoption (e.g. 50% deskops vs. 5%).

Do you have a reliable ref for the cost comparison?

IBM does studies, though they are to be taken with a grain of salt. http://www.cio.com/article/3001871/macbook/switch-to-macs-fr... Thing is they're one of the few companies that are proponents of both Mac and Linux (plus their own UNIX variant) as well as Windows.

It really depends on the company and the nature of work people are doing. Some software is a mess on anything but Windows. Some software is actually better on Linux.