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

Microsoft's Linux Kernel

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 532 posts

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#221

Post by ozim »

phkahler wrote: post #174
mrbungie wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, except in this case is just one goalpost and everyone wins. Now we can enjoy using software as MS Office and userland from Linux distros in the same machine seamlessly.

This is the "embrace" phase. It also kind of encompasses "extend" by adding hardware support via Windows drivers. This alone is not enough to get to "extinguish" though, so allow me to make a prediction. The next step is fully locked down hardware that requires a signed OS. Linux will not run on it, but MS will pretend to support you by allowing linux apps to run on their kernel. Then, once no hardware will allow you…

Problem with this line of thinking is that operating system kernel matters. It does not anymore. What matters now is: if people are buying their cloud solution. No one cares about desktop users, no one cares about selling server OS. Real money is in big/medium companies buying their cloud stuff with nice monthly subscription. Good luck making people pay you every month for an OS, they don't want to upgrade and pay for new one even in 10 years so running Win XP.

In that line of thinking you also want costs of running your own cloud solution as low as possible, so it kind of even makes sense to phase out Windows because all competitors are running their cloud on Linux based systems, where they get all upsides of collaboration on Linux. Where MS trying to run all their stuff on Win pour money into something they could have for free or just also investing a lot less into Linux than what they spend maintaining Win.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#223

Post by crispinb »

meruru wrote: post #218
nine_k wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Upvoting moves comments (threads) closer to top. Downvoting does the opposite, and dowvoting below 0 makes comments look fainter.

This is basically it. I upvote things I want to go up and downvote things I want to go down. Off-topic meta discussions about votes should always go down.

Sure, I know what it does, I'm just not sure why anyone would use it. I never do normally want a comment to go up or down (other than the odd egregiously abusive or aggressive item).

I may disagree with a comment, but that doesn't remotely generate in me an opinion re where it should sit in the tree. I don't think other people should or are likely to find a comment agreeable/interesting/relevant/insightful just because I do. Different strokes I guess.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#226

Post by meruru »

Osiris wrote: post #88
gorio wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite the wording I don't think that is the original definition? The idea is to make Linux viable as a desktop operating system, and whatever comes with that. Not running Linux as an application on another desktop. Which is almost the opposite as in leveraging capabilities outside of Linux. Maybe more importantly redefining the goal isn't helping Linux much. I remember everyone raving about Android, but now look at…

Given that drivers are Linux's biggest problem, isn't there benefit to leveraging Windows drivers and then running Linux on top of that virtualized hardware? I don't see why you couldn't run x11 in the window manager with the new Linux kernel in Windows.

Drivers are far from the biggest problem for Linux adoption. The biggest problems are:

  + Network Effects
  + Brand recognition in the general public
  + Indifference to FOSS principles
  + Resistance to change

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#227

Post by crispinb »

chungy wrote: post #169
crispinb wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a total aside, but I really don't understand voting on comments. I've no idea what it could mean - levels of agreement, interest, offensiveness (or scores of other possibilities)? It seems entirely meaningless, therefore pointless, to me.

I'm giving you an upvote. Make of it what you will. :)

Thank you (I think?) for making me aware of that ;)

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#228

Post by godelski »

marcianx wrote: post #68
godelski wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just want Linux with the ability to use PowerPoint. (I also want to just be about to plug in my HDMI to my laptop and have it work. Literally the only two things I care about)

FWIW, I have given major conference talks years back on my linux laptop with PowerPoint running via Crossover Office (wine), mostly due to my advisor's insistence on using PowerPoint. So that has already been a thing for a long while.

My issue is that with nvidia laptops the hdmi connection almost never works as expected, when I have cuda installed. I'll try proprietary or noveau drivers. I've driven my monitor with intel drivers. I've tried so many things, but it has been multiple laptops that I've just never gotten this to work. I just can't have cuda and use my laptop for presentations. So I just always keep a windows partition just for presentations. If you do have a suggestion I'd love to hear it.

I've never used crossover. Thanks, I'll look into it.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#229

Post by nojvek »

Haha. Linux really was a virus. The good kind that eventually won out because it was open and solved real problems that people wanted it everywhere.

MS really playing the “we’ll go wherever the developers are” game really well.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#230

Post by vbezhenar »

jdoliner wrote: post #6

My brain threw an exception when I read this title. Awesome that this is a reality though. Now that we have a Linux kernels running and accessible on both Windows and Chromebooks I feel like we can finally say: 2019 actually is the year of Linux on the desktop. It's not a meme anymore, it's finally just a true statement. Edit: To those questioning if this really counts as Linux on the Desktop. Yes, I understand what…

Installing Linux in VirtualBox is not hard. If anything, it's extremely easy. Microsoft does not bring anything substantial, you could use Linux in VirtualBox since forever and they just bundle it in their OS. Windows just getting worse and worse. I was amazed when they decided to develop Linux syscall layer, but now it's just extremely lazy approach. Hey, guys, we don't have enough money to build proper Linux layer, let's just ship VirtualBox with Windows. LoL. I just don't understand all that hype. There's nothing innovative with their approach.
Post reply on HN