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

231–240 of 532 posts

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#231

Post by mrmonkeyman »

"Embrace, extend, and extinguish"

These words are not made up by journalists, these are the exact words Microsoft used internally.

They do this, every. Single. Time.

Everyone keeps falling for it, talking proudly about how MS changed so much and they are now somehow totally turned around. Yes.. ok, whatever you need to believe in. Just be warned, they will utterly drstroy everything they come into contact with.

Or should I say: denial is the most predictable of all human responses. But, rest assured, this will be the umpteenth time we have destroyed it, and we have become exceedingly efficient at it.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#232

Post by tsimionescu »

fortran77 wrote: post #191
robrtsql wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the OP is probably referring to the fact that running Docker on Windows and macOS is accomplished by running a Linux VM which the Docker containers run in. Not that Docker containers are VMs.

I didn't know that macOS users don't run Docker natively! On Windows, it's native: https://docs.docker.com/docker-for-windows/

In practice, the vast majority of docker containers are Linux containers, so most uses of docker for windows need a Linux kernel to do anything useful.

As such, the 'native' docker for windows you linked is actually managing a Linux VM (HyperV or VBox) fot you; the docker server runs on that VM, and the native docker windows binary simply connects to that server.

They also do a lot of tricks to connect networking and file shares with that VM. The file shares part is almost completely non-working in my experience, with scary comments in the bugs like 'doesn't work if your windows password contains certain characters' (it sets up CIFS shares between the Linux VM and some parts of your Windows file system).

So, not sure what docker for Mac looks like, but Docker For Windows is only 'native' in a very hand-wavy sort of way, unless (maybe) if you're running Windows docker containers.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#233

Post by pritambaral »

fortran77 wrote: post #191
robrtsql wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the OP is probably referring to the fact that running Docker on Windows and macOS is accomplished by running a Linux VM which the Docker containers run in. Not that Docker containers are VMs.

I didn't know that macOS users don't run Docker natively! On Windows, it's native: https://docs.docker.com/docker-for-windows/

That cannot run Linux containers, only Windows containers, no?

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#234

Post by _ph_ »

emmelaich wrote: post #164

What's the bet that MacOS will switch to the Linux kernel within the next five years?

What would be the motivation for Apple to do such a thing? MacOS is already a Unix, with a BSD-based userland. Also, they are doing active kernel development - as in architecture development - to enhance the system security, so that even root cannot compromise the system. One part of this is moving kernel extensions into user processes thanks to the fact that Mach is a microkernel. They couldn't do that with the current Linux architecture.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#235

Post by hn23 »

inlined wrote: post #200
ngcc_hk wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was hardwired with that memory.

My hardwired memory is when Ballmer mocked me publicly during an intern Q&A for asking if Apple could become a threat in 2006.

Would you like to elaborate? Always eager to hear such anecdotes:)

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#236

Post by emptyparadise »

vbezhenar wrote: post #230
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,…

Somebody link that one Dropbox comment.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#237

Post by dehrmann »

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…

While people nitpick over what "linux desktop" means, don't lose sight of the fact that general purpose computing is slowly dying and being replaced by iOS and Android. Roughly as many iPhones are sold per year as desktops and laptops combined.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#238

Post by marvy »

meruru wrote: post #226
Osiris wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

One more: OEMs like Dell and HP aren't allowed (by Microsoft) to sell PCs that dual-boot between Windows and something else, such as GNU/Linux so the only people that get to try Linux are those that have it pre-installed as the only OS, or those willing and able to install it themselves. Source: read about it somewhere or other; main topic was the history of BeOS.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#239

Post by hollerith »

oil25 wrote: post #117

We've come a long way from Bill Gates' original characterization of open source (long before it was called that) as thievery - https://worldhistoryproject.org/1976/2/bill-gates-writes-ope... I'm still sure as ever Microsoft is no friend of free (as in Freedom, not price) software and can't help but shake my head at this latest publicity stunt. I wouldn't trust their software any further than I throw it.

"Open source" has a precise definition [1], and your comment does not use the term correctly.

[1] https://opensource.org/osd

In particular, if the software or "work" was never made freely available by its lawful owner, it is not open source.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#240

Post by dehrmann »

scardine wrote: post #114
ChuckMcM wrote: post #51

Well that is pretty nice. WSL gets that much more exactly like Linux. What I really appreciate about WSL is that you get the accessibility of a bunch of OSS projects and a machine which has legit drivers for all of its component bits. What this means to me is that searching for a "linux laptop" won't be a chore, if it runs the latest Windows it will run Linux. And I can do development on the Linux side while communic…

There are a few annoyances with WSL2. For me the most important are: 1. You can't connect to a port listening on WSL localhost like in WSL1, you have to figure out the WSL IP address and use that. 2. From WSL you can't connect to a Windows TCP port on localhost, you must figure out the Windows IP (cat /etc/resolv.conf) and use that. 3. The WSL remote interpreter on PyCharm is not working anymore. The suggested workar…

> you must figure out the Windows IP

The existence of c:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts cracks me up. Supposedly [citation needed] Windows uses/used part of the BSD network stack.

Post reply on HN