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

Last Phase of the Desktop Wars?

esr.ibiblio.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 166 posts

Re: Last Phase of the Desktop Wars?

#61

Post by mixmastamyk »

qubex wrote: post #19

This argument totally ignores Microsoft’s consideration of what might happen after that endgame-state, and what utility (if any) it would have for them. Specifically, Microsoft would have everything to lose if it placed all of the Windows-like APIs into their Linux kernel, even if that were in the interests of “de-complexifying” their Azure business, because after that they’d be on par with every other Cloud/PaaS pro…

AWS is one of the most expensive options. MS, despite its traditionally anti-competitive management has better tech chops than anyone besides google.

Re: Last Phase of the Desktop Wars?

#62

Post by quesera »

scarface74 wrote: post #48
greyman wrote: post #34

Just a sidenote, after 25 years of using Windows, I switched to OSX. But following the article logic, that can also be considered a Unix. :-)

OS X is not considered Unix. OS X is officially certified Unix by the Open Group.

> OS X is officially certified Unix

And, notably, Linux is _not_ Unix, for a variety of reasonable reasons.

Re: Last Phase of the Desktop Wars?

#63

Post by nix23 »

alkonaut wrote: post #53
ImprobableTruth wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you consider android a linux distro?

Well at least I thought so (for the same reason as ChromeOS). People seem divided on the topic. Obviously if distro means “Linux kernel based OS” then it’s a distro just like chromeOS. The Linux foundation for example, thinks Android is a Linux distribution. It’s those who don’t must argue something more than just the kernel is needed, such as more GNU stuff. Exactly what that is, is what I’m curious about and why I…

>Well at least I thought so

Android and ChromeOS are Marketplace-(App) Runtime NOT a Linux Distro

>The Linux foundation for example, thinks Android is a Linux distribution

Well they compare it with embedded Linux:

https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/2013/03/intro-to-embedd...

> Wikipedia and others list it as a distribution.

No they don't:

>>Android is a mobile operating system based on a modified version of the Linux kernel and other open source software

Debian:

>>Debian (/ˈdɛbiən/),[5][6] also known as Debian GNU/Linux, is a Linux distribution composed of free and open-source software,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_distribution#Linux_kerne...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_distribution

Re: Last Phase of the Desktop Wars?

#64

Post by wmf »

vikramkr wrote: post #27
varbhat wrote: post #22

I am afraid of EEE strategy of Microsoft . But,Windows having WSL means that Developers can target Linux only without even considering Windows , being sure that all Linux binaries run on WSL . But proprietary extensions of WSL should never ever be used.

EEE is not going to have any impact on Linux (and also, EEE hasnt been Microsof's strategy for a while). Once they start extending with proprietary additions, you basically just end up where you were with two operating systems, a proprietary windows and an open source Linux. They can't force the kernel to accept proprietary extensions.

There is a concern that mainstream proprietarized "Linux" becomes completely incompatible with real Linux to the detriment of Linux's values and the people who care about those values.

Re: Last Phase of the Desktop Wars?

#66

Post by grishka »

3np wrote: post #50
ericmcer wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely agree, a Mac you get Mac OS, Ubuntu you get Ubuntu, Windows you get some Frankenstein of the OS, Mcafee, Dell, and various other companies applications all stitched together.

Those parts are easily removed by doing a vanilla install the first thing you do. Windows (esp 10) still had some built-in things you don't get away from though. And also all the dialogues from self-updating software and plugins.

It is possible to disable or uninstall all the user-hostile components like Windows Update, telemetry, and the app store, but it takes some effort and manual registry editing.

The bigger problem, though, is all the legacy that's holding it back in the name of backwards compatibility. The WinAPI is older than myself. You can still run Windows 95 programs on your new Windows 10 PC. While useful to some, I'll never understand why exactly is it done this way. Apple keeps dropping old APIs to make their OSes better and simpler internally. I've never used anything that came before OS X, but I did read a lot that it was terrible and unstable, just like Windows at the time. Except modern macOS is stable and robust, while Windows still feels extremely fragile and unreliable after all these years.

Yes, I understand that Microsoft is hellbent that modern Windows versions need to be able to run 25-year-old binaries unmodified. But they could've achieved the exact same thing by putting genuine Windows 95 into a VM and seamlessly integrating it with the desktop.

Re: Last Phase of the Desktop Wars?

#67

Post by pjmlp »

TheRealPomax wrote: post #56

> and Linux finally wins the desktop wars, not by displacing Windows but by co-opting it That's not a "win", though. That's "being subsumed". After all, if LSW works, why would anyone with normal computing needs ever need to install Linux on a computer ever again? Or even in a VM, for that matter? As long as they have Windows, they get the parts of Linux they need for free, without the headache of actually learning t…

Not all, my Windows machines are yet to see any instance of WSL running.

As for your bash example, I have run various versions of it across many kinds of POSIX like OSes.

Yes Linux is irrelevant, it is just a free beer UNIX clone, tomorrow another UNIX clone can take its place.

Re: Last Phase of the Desktop Wars?

#68

Post by quesera »

nix23 wrote: post #16
x87678r wrote: post #12

> Linux finally wins the desktop wars ChromeOS is storming along - best desktop version of linux around. If I could easily run IntellJ on it I would switch.

>best linux distro around. If I could easily run IntellJ on it I would switch. It's not a Distro.

> It's not a Distro.

Sure it is.

It's not a general purpose distro (running on GP/COTS hardware), but it is a software distribution built around a Linux kernel.

Re: Last Phase of the Desktop Wars?

#70

Post by alkonaut »

nix23 wrote: post #63
alkonaut wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well at least I thought so (for the same reason as ChromeOS). People seem divided on the topic. Obviously if distro means “Linux kernel based OS” then it’s a distro just like chromeOS. The Linux foundation for example, thinks Android is a Linux distribution. It’s those who don’t must argue something more than just the kernel is needed, such as more GNU stuff. Exactly what that is, is what I’m curious about and why I…

>Well at least I thought so Android and ChromeOS are Marketplace-(App) Runtime NOT a Linux Distro >The Linux foundation for example, thinks Android is a Linux distribution Well they compare it with embedded Linux: https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/2013/03/intro-to-embedd... > Wikipedia and others list it as a distribution. No they don't: >>Android is a mobile operating system based on a modified version of the Lin…

What are the criteria required for an OS using the Linux kernel to be called a “distribution” then?

Including GNU or free software in the definition seems arbitrary... Is there a class of applications (that aren’t apps from a store) that must be runnable?

Or do you mean that distro is short for “GNU/Linux distribution”?

I’m not arguing for/against (since it’s obviously a long-standing debate), what I’m interested in is the criteria for what makes something a distro.

Post reply on HN