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

Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 225 posts

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#21

Post by MR4D »

geofft wrote: post #11
simonblack wrote: post #3

I suggested on Mini-Microsoft about 10 years ago that Microsoft do an 'Apple'. Apple took a free OS from BSD and put their own GUI over the top of it. I suggested that MSFT do the same sort of thing, that being to put their Windows GUI on top of the Linux OS instead of using the Linux X11 GUIs. This had the advantage that the underlying OS base would no longer need maintaining by Microsoft, and all their coding effor…

Apple only needed to support their own hardware. Microsoft would need to make Linux work wherever NT works, and would need to figure out a solution for third-party closed-source NT drivers. Besides, in a sense, Microsoft did this when they moved the desktop product line to NT. It wsa a similar compatibility break and a similar improvement in stability and switch to a robust, multiuser, preemptively-multitasking kerne…

A shortcut (perhaps the wrong word here) would be to migrate the Xbox to Xbox libraries on top of a Linux core. This would minimize the hardware for them to start with.

After a couple years, they could make Windows server run on a Linux core, and then another couple years have Windows run on Linux.

The whole progression could be pretty smooth, covering several years and taking a milestone-driven approach.

With the surface, im sure hey could use that to their advantage and have kore control over hardware.

Perhaps the best impetus to do this would be if they ever really wanted to migrate to ARM and reduce their reliance on the intel platform.

The hardware piece is important, but definitely controllable. Just like you mentioned NT, but this time with a smaller set of vendors to work with.

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#22

Post by h1d »

paxys wrote: post #8

The most realistic path to this would be them buying Canonical. I doubt they are going to roll their own distro from scratch.

If 2 of the biggest Linux distributors get owned by giants with their intention of trying to save themselves than save the market is going to be a bad ride.

What other commercially supported option do we have for those concerned?

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#23

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

overgard wrote: post #19

I see a lot of “why not” but no actual “why”. Microsoft loses strategic platform control and gains: ... crickets

I honestly don't think Microsoft cares about the Windows Desktop platform anymore. Certainly their actions regarding Windows 10 don't suggest that they do.

My bet is that if they release a Linux distro, it will be Microsoft's take on ChromeOS, tied to Azure and Office 365 and all that, with any other stuff shunted off somewhere in a container or VM. Oh, you can install your own software from other sources at will, you'll just have to compile it yourself or rely on a network of repos and maintainers. It'll be the death of everything I actually like about computing and I'm not looking forward to it.

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#24

Post by h1d »

rbanffy wrote: post #2

They could even use WSL to put Linux on top of the NT kernel. It'd be called Microsoft GNU/Windows. Or they could ditch the GNU part and go for a non-GNU libc and userland like the article suggests. That wouldn't save nearly as much money as the article speculates because the Windows userland is humongous - NT is a small part of the whole, much like the Linux kernel is a vanishingly small part of the distributed effo…

Is WSL that complete?

There could be tons of edge cases where stock Linux binaries could behave slightly differently and could be a support nightmare.

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#26

Post by gcbw2 »

No. They just plan to use developer tools (chrome based browser + vstudio) to push their one-push-publish-to-cloud.

embrace (chromium), extend (dev tool features that will only work with vsStudio but is awesome), extinguish (tool now only work with vsstudio when serving from azure because they are moving faster than open standards.)

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#27

Post by h1d »

If it happens, it would be the most jaw dropping event of the decade.

But MS has a room to keep their own ecosystem as losing it will have less diversity as we've seen when they dropped Edge not to mention the world will come to a halt without Windows that can run apps from the last 20 years.

Having a UNIX kernel at the core would be really nice which would make developers easy to port apps between OS but how would the world deal with all the irreplaceable apps on Windows?

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#28

Post by ryacko »

rbanffy wrote: post #2

They could even use WSL to put Linux on top of the NT kernel. It'd be called Microsoft GNU/Windows. Or they could ditch the GNU part and go for a non-GNU libc and userland like the article suggests. That wouldn't save nearly as much money as the article speculates because the Windows userland is humongous - NT is a small part of the whole, much like the Linux kernel is a vanishingly small part of the distributed effo…

The last time Microsoft released a monolithic kernel was with Windows ME.

Google has developed their own non-GPL userlands, u-root and toybox.

Personally am surprised that Microsoft did not try to compete with OpenVZ and offer their own containers or easier to script sandbox.

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#29

Post by DylanDmitri »

overgard wrote: post #19

I see a lot of “why not” but no actual “why”. Microsoft loses strategic platform control and gains: ... crickets

While desktop platform control is important and probably has a positive ROI, the article argues that desktop OSs are already "good enough", and that Microsoft can probably find more profitable alternatives for their engineering effort.

This is the same motive behind the switch to Chromium, that browsers are "good enough" and that the marginal gains of platform independence aren't worth the heavy investment.

Post reply on HN