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

341–350 of 532 posts

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#341

Post by acqq »

mtzet wrote: post #265

This is really Microsoft catching up to the Mac in terms of integration with the open-source ecosystem which importantly drives the web. In the mid 2000's the Mac really took off due to being a good-enough Linux replacement on the command line, while taking care of all the hardware integration and providing a sleek desktop experience. This really helped the Mac take off among hackers. This system wasn't as open-sourc…

> rather than trying to fit Linux applications in Windows, they're running in their own world and providing integrations into this world.

It is effectively their way to have an "integrated Linux virtual machine" inside of Windows. The WSL1 on Windows was relatively similar (but not enough for me) to Wine on Linux. The WSL2 is in some ways "more integrated" than the typical VM would be, but otherwise still similar to that.

Not enough: my greatest disappointment up to now is that the "VM-like" behavior was present even in WSL1, if I understood correctly, the files "inside" were more special than the files inside Cygwin folders would be.

Another disappointment was: it was not easy to install WSL on previous Windows 10 versions. Specifically, it was "in app store" but you weren't supposed to "click to install" -- it resulted in something weird. There were recipes what to do from the command line with hoops to take care of, so at the end... I've installed Cygwin, which I knew will work. Does anybody know, did WSL get better now?

(Edit: in the last sentence: s/ it / WSL /)

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#342

Post by goodcanadian »

gorio wrote: post #340
goodcanadian wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For most purposes, it has been ready for years. There are a handful of proprietary programs that individual people may need for work that aren't available, and you aren't going to be able to play the latest games on Linux. Most people, however, could switch to one of many Linux distributions and be just as productive if not moreso.

Then we disagree. Linux works until is doesn't, which is the problem. It isn't a handful of programs so much as a wide range of capabilities. We can all speculate the taste of the average user, but do you think companies wouldn't love running desktop Linux instead of paying millions to Microsoft? That is what everyone did when Linux actually became good enough as a server OS.

I guess we do, as I've said elsewhere, it has literally been years since I've encountered anything I couldn't do on Linux just the same as on Windows. I firmly believe the reason more organisations haven't changed is inertia. To paraphrase a cliché, no one was ever fired for choosing Microsoft.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#343

Post by ehnto »

dehrmann wrote: post #237
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.

Considering the majority of work computing is done on desktops I'm not sure it will be replaced by iOS or Android any time soon.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#344

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#345

Post by posix_me_less »

kpU8efre7r wrote: post #183
hereme888 wrote: post #125

I see it as another publicity stunt by the Big 5 tech companies to save their reputation amidst years of anti-privacy violations. From buying Github, to "supporting" open-source software. Yeah right, more like marketing to save your reputation. I'll keep moving further and further away from Big Tech. Will Microsoft send themselves more "aggregated" user data on how their new Linux kernel is being used? Will this have…

How do you guys have time to get any work done with all this zealotry?

It is possible. First, sometimes it is more benefitial to just pass on the shiny corp gadget. They are new, they look cool, everybody talks about them, but you often find that you can save attention span and protect privacy by ignoring it (e.g. facebook). Second, this stance make you look for alternatives. First you give up a lot, you have to work harder to work around. But if you do, you will have to go deeper into technology and think about how those things work. So it gives back so much in terms of brain development.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#346

Post by oaiey »

asanagi_traps wrote: post #338

Are they going to push this to upstream ever? How are they, or we, are going to catch up when thousands of lines of code are added every day.

When I remember right, Microsoft is already a big contributor to the Linux Kernel. Do not forget, Azure has tons of Linux machines hosted. I think they know exactly how to ha ndle this.

And I think currently they are just patching their own Linux together like any distro does

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#347

Post by rbanffy »

mtzet wrote: post #265

This is really Microsoft catching up to the Mac in terms of integration with the open-source ecosystem which importantly drives the web. In the mid 2000's the Mac really took off due to being a good-enough Linux replacement on the command line, while taking care of all the hardware integration and providing a sleek desktop experience. This really helped the Mac take off among hackers. This system wasn't as open-sourc…

> I find it fairly easy to work on both Mac OS X, Linux and WSL2 -- but not pre-WSL Windows

The thing that annoys me most on Windows is Windows itself. After using Linuxes for almost two decades now, the notion of the OS taking tens of minutes to self update when all I wanted was to quickly reboot it is unbearable.

> I don't know how/if they're going to handle freeing memory again -- here the NT kernel really needs to communicate with the Linux kernel

Usually "free" memory only happens when a Linux machine starts. During normal usage most of the memory is being used to cache things and, when some large app frees its own memory (such as when Slack quits) it'll eventually be used for other things.

Not sure how that would work. Memory doesn't stay unused in Linux for long - whatever programs free will end up being used to cache information that's slow to access.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#348

Post by rbanffy »

acqq wrote: post #341
mtzet wrote: post #265

This is really Microsoft catching up to the Mac in terms of integration with the open-source ecosystem which importantly drives the web. In the mid 2000's the Mac really took off due to being a good-enough Linux replacement on the command line, while taking care of all the hardware integration and providing a sleek desktop experience. This really helped the Mac take off among hackers. This system wasn't as open-sourc…

> rather than trying to fit Linux applications in Windows, they're running in their own world and providing integrations into this world. It is effectively their way to have an "integrated Linux virtual machine" inside of Windows. The WSL1 on Windows was relatively similar (but not enough for me) to Wine on Linux. The WSL2 is in some ways "more integrated" than the typical VM would be, but otherwise still similar to…

> I've installed Cygwin, which I knew will work. Does anybody know, did it get better better now?

I really like Cygwin. With the MinTTY terminal, it was very nice. Slower than native Linux (or Windows), but enough of an environment to make me happy and productive.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#349

Post by posix_me_less »

kpU8efre7r wrote: post #179

Too many free / non-free / Linux / OSS ideologues. Does this let users do more? Does this give users more options? This is a good, practical feature. I'm excited to, hopefully soon, fully ditch Linux on desktop for something that actually works.

This system even installs new Microsoft software and tracks all your actions without any respect for you turning it off. Finally you can forget about the pain of deciding what is going on in your computer. Microsoft just knows the best so it indeed "just works(TM)". /s

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#350

Post by jasode »

goodcanadian wrote: post #264
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…

I keep seeing this angst over whether Linux will ever be ready on the desktop. Well, I've been using it exclusively for something like 15 years.

>I keep seeing this angst over whether Linux will ever be ready on the desktop. Well, I've been using it exclusively for something like 15 years.

>For most purposes, it has been ready for years.[...] Most people, however, could switch to one of many Linux distributions and be just as productive if not moreso.

If "most people" includes non-technical users, I doubt they could switch to Linux without difficulties.

E.g. a typical non-geek user might be my friend that runs Windows. Some examples of showstoppers that makes Linux totally a non-option:

- Intuit Quicken which she's been using for 20 years. Yes Linux Mint was a possible alternative but its early releases (inside of your 15-year time period) didn't have reliable online downloads from financial institutions. Mint's later partnership with Yodlee api for transaction downloads still didn't make it equal to Quicken. Yes, Quicken is terrible and buggy software but early Mint was even worse for online banking scenarios.

- Netflix streaming was not easy to run on Linux until recently[0]

- AAA games (including recent ones like Fortnite) don't run easily on Linux. Valve Steam Proton is a recent effort.

- iPhone sync with Apple iTunes - running on Linux requires googling for articles of running a Windows vm or Rhythmbox on Ubuntu which may not work with certain iOS updates

- sewing machine embroidery software all runs on Windows and not Linux or even MacOS. The software also requires a dongle for copy-protection and the hardware drivers for the dongles only exist for Windows. Running Windows as a vm inside of a Linux Desktop and exposing the host USB port to the client vm won't fool the dongle software. If the ultimate solution to "Windows in a virtual machine" shortfalls is to dual-boot Windows and Linux, that advanced configuration adds more complexity and it contradicts the ideal of "run Linux desktop exclusively".

For people to run Linux without issue, the person would need to possess technical skills equivalent to you (e.g. a HN poster) -- or the person has a "guardian angel" as on-call tech support (e.g. a son/daughter/friend) to get them over technical issues (like Netflix) with workarounds.

I don't doubt you've been able to run Linux exclusively and there are more examples like you. Nevertheless, it still required a very atypical usage profile to run a Linux desktop exclusively for the last 15 years.

Even today in 2019, I would not recommend the Linux desktop to any of my non-programmer and non-sysadmin type of friends & family unless I was willing to be their on-call tech support to handle their inevitable Windows compatibility issues.

For Linux to work in a mass-consumer-facing situation, it has to be an "appliance" type of installation and "invisible" such that the user doesn't realize they're running Linux. E.g. as the underlying os in Android smartphones, or the os in smart TVs, or the os in Tesla cars.

[0] https://itsfoss.com/watch-netflix-in-ubuntu-linux/

Post reply on HN