Live data from Hacker News

Windows Server 2019 Includes OpenSSH

blogs.windows.com

141–150 of 296 posts

Re: Windows Server 2019 Includes OpenSSH

#141
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They already had group policy for structured administration. What Windows was missing specifically was a non-GUI way for that unstructured "get in there and fix the problem" work flow. Structured workflows may well be better for you, but quick and dirty has a lot of appeal. Sometimes you just have to give people the candy they want - even if its not good for them.

> "get in there and fix the problem" work flow Isn't this an anti-pattern considering the cloud tenants of treating machines as cattle not pets?

[deleted]

Re: Windows Server 2019 Includes OpenSSH

#142
Back when I was a sysadmin at Microsoft, we installed F-Secure's SSH server on every server we built (Messenger/Hotmail). The Windows team thought we were nuts. Well, what do you expect if you ask a bunch of Solaris admins to run Windows?

There were no real alternatives. I remember when they got all excited about showing off remote Powershell to us circa 2004, and we collectively rolled our eyes.

Re: Windows Server 2019 Includes OpenSSH

#143
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They already had group policy for structured administration. What Windows was missing specifically was a non-GUI way for that unstructured "get in there and fix the problem" work flow. Structured workflows may well be better for you, but quick and dirty has a lot of appeal. Sometimes you just have to give people the candy they want - even if its not good for them.

> "get in there and fix the problem" work flow Isn't this an anti-pattern considering the cloud tenants of treating machines as cattle not pets?

Windows had this problem much earlier with every employee getting a PC on their desk. They solved it with Group Policy and domains. That still works well.

SSH and Remote Desktop solve a different problem. It may not be the one you have - but some of us just need to log into the machine because we have needs that don’t fit into some predefined workflow. Or we have so few boxes it’s not worth it.

Consider SSHing into a large build machine for compiling as an example.

Re: Windows Server 2019 Includes OpenSSH

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They started on this in the late 2000s when I was an intern there. But there was a lot to untangle. It’s the biggest refactoring job you can imagine. A decade long effort. Back then they didn’t really understand the point of ssh though. They had a vision of remote management via .net RPC and powershell.

I dont know if that means they didnt understand it. It reads like they were trying to solve the underlying problems with a different approach. SSH is an awesome tool & capability as a relatively high level network channel. The defacto “shell” approach leads to a lot of problems when used as a management device. It encourages adhoc, unstructured, and opaque changes. Managing your hosts via Secure Shell simply leads to…

> Managing your hosts via Secure Shell simply leads to bespoke, unrepeatable, outcomes and crushing debt.

SSH is not for management. SSH is for remote access. What people do with their remote access is not SSH's concern. Ad-hoc management is just as possible and easy via RSAT and PowerShell. Hell, I've seen management via ansible devolve into a mess of unmaintainable, unrepeatable script heap.

> Moving to a well structered, repeatable, management paradigm is the only way to survive large or long term deployments.

And how would such a paradigm remotely access the machines? The tool I use uses SSH for:

1. Running commands on remote machines, interactively & non-interactively;

2. Synchronising files on remote machines, via SFTP and Rsync;

3. Forwarding network ports to provide secure access to remote services, e.g. Redis.

Personally, I've been trying to move app deployment and debugging onto SSH in every team I've worked with, and I will be very happy when developers are able to treat a remote machine (development or production) as little more than just a well-managed local machine.

Re: Windows Server 2019 Includes OpenSSH

#145
post #98

Always a bit of a mystery to me that POSIX users couldn't figure out Windows until they added a bunch of Unix stuff to it. Here was me thinking that Unix fans were the clever ones, able to learn whatever they put their mind to, unlike the shit-flinging Windows monkeys, able to acquire new skills only through heroic amounts of rote memorization.

Not that I agree with your characterisation, but using something requires more than just learning (about) it.

Re: Windows Server 2019 Includes OpenSSH

#148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of those GUIs are just wrappers for the CLI to begin with. Heck, the default installation of windows does not even have a GUI. People ahem really need to update their thinking of what it means to be Windows.

> People ahem really need to update their thinking of what it means to be Windows. Why? What benefit is there to me using windows rather than a proper operating system?

What are your criteria for a "proper operating system" that just happen to exclude the most-used desktop operating system?

Re: Windows Server 2019 Includes OpenSSH

#149
post #2

That is really something, before as a dev coming from linux when I first was about to login on a Windows Server I didn't understand how to do it since it were no SSH. Administrating the server via a GUI always felt backwards somehow. Why waste CPU cycles on rendering a UI when the CLI is so great (on linux)?

For just one thing, I find it a lot nicer being able to edit config files in Notepad++ or something instead of vim or nano. In my case I mount the remote Linux server as a drive on Windows.

Mounting requires other ports to be opened, which no sysadmin will do on the internet. Ssh on the other hand can be started on a non standard port.

Re: Windows Server 2019 Includes OpenSSH

#150
post #12
post #6

So now I’m just waiting to hear Microsoft is switching its kernel to Linux. Especially after the switch to chromium.

Not sure if a joke, but I'd absolutely love this. I, as a consumer, would gladly pay good money to be able to use Outlook and the MS Office suite. Regardless of what anyone claims, the linux alternatives are useable but not nearly as good. I used to use Windows with Cygwin, but found I spent way more time doing linux-y things than Windows-y things...so switched away.

Why not Mac? Best of both worlds.
Post reply on HN