11–20 of 97 posts
Genuine question: Why not just virtualbox/vmware it up with an ISO ? That's how I've been doing for years and it works just fine.
This runs fully alongside the Host OS, from what I can see.
While I can see this is an excellent strategy for the Windows platform, and will probably make developers on Windows more productive, I for one will never give up natively installed linux distributions for development. It may be childish, but I resent Windows for every anti-privacy, anti-competitive move they make, despite how much it is within their rights and fitting with their corporate goals. Trying to put linux…
On the other hand, we could be entering a phase where an open source developer might say "Why bother porting to Windows? Just target Arch/Ubuntu/SUSE."
Guess the only reason to have VMWare on my windows machine is going away soon. Hope there are some reduction in computational overhead.
Then again, according to Wikipedia, maybe they were already planning for this?
> VMware Workstation versions 12.0.0, 12.0.1, and 12.1.0 were released at intervals of about two months in 2015.[61] In January 2016 the entire development team behind VMware Workstation and Fusion was disbanded and all US developers were immediately fired.[8][9][10][12] The future of these products remained vague; the company said that development would continue. On April 24, 2016, maintenance release 12.1.1 was released. VMware announced the release on 8 September 2016 of Workstation 12.5 and Fusion 8.5 as a free upgrade supporting Windows 10 Anniversary edition and Windows Server 2016.[13]
WSL (Windows Subsystem for Linux) isn't virtualized, as the article states. https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/wsl/2016/04/22/windows-subs... It's aim is to run Linux binaries natively. The degree of it's usefulness, issues and filesystem interoperability was discussed before so won't get into that.
So it's sorta like a reverse WINE?
Genuine question: Why not just virtualbox/vmware it up with an ISO ? That's how I've been doing for years and it works just fine.
No one is taking away your VM, don't worry.
Genuine question: Why not just virtualbox/vmware it up with an ISO ? That's how I've been doing for years and it works just fine.
It's a different approach. WSL is more like CoLinux back in the day, in that Windows and Linux kernels run alongside each other. Even a bit better integrated because processes across both worlds can run each other, and see and talk to each other. No one is taking away your VM, don't worry.
This should provide way better latency than my VM tho, right?
Genuine question: Why not just virtualbox/vmware it up with an ISO ? That's how I've been doing for years and it works just fine.
It's a different approach. WSL is more like CoLinux back in the day, in that Windows and Linux kernels run alongside each other. Even a bit better integrated because processes across both worlds can run each other, and see and talk to each other. No one is taking away your VM, don't worry.
While I can see this is an excellent strategy for the Windows platform, and will probably make developers on Windows more productive, I for one will never give up natively installed linux distributions for development. It may be childish, but I resent Windows for every anti-privacy, anti-competitive move they make, despite how much it is within their rights and fitting with their corporate goals. Trying to put linux…
On the other hand, we could be entering a phase where an open source developer might say "Why bother porting to Windows? Just target Arch/Ubuntu/SUSE."
While possibly a highly unpopular opinion, this is where I think solutions like Electron/Node Webkit fit perfectly.I think this is actually kind of already solved (just not with the tools that everyone may want). We shouldn't be even aiming for any particular distribution to begin with, at the expense of a larger executable and less-than-native UI performance, you get write once ship just-about-everywhere when you use tools like electron/node webkit.
Developers often hate web programming, but it's just about the only easy to pick up, and relatively consistent tool for the job of platforms that "just work" (pretty much) everywhere right now. It even seems like the best way to do it going forward, given that:
- Browser companies will work hard towards making browsers faster and efficient, because it's in their best interest (which is the best kind of guarantee).
- Cross-platform minded languages like Go or Rust will become more popular for those who want to get away from using JS at all, and JS could basically become an RPC layer for the "real" application
- Once WASM really takes to the mainstream, languages will just compile it to it. WASM already has LLVM support, so there's a bunch of languages for free already.
So soon, JS won't even be the sticking point in why people dislike distributing cross-platform apps with Electron/NodeJS, then we'll focus on things like executable size and memory usage, and solutions will pop up for those things too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, we could be entering a phase where an open source developer might say "Why bother porting to Windows? Just target Arch/Ubuntu/SUSE."
Not sure how viable that strategy is, considering that WSL is more a developer tool than something normal end users would install. But many open-source developers already don't care about porting to Windows, so not much changes, I guess.