111–120 of 158 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably some amount. I agree Windows is strategic, but do definitely could see them giving it away and/or fully open sourcing it.
It is most likely impossible, given the amount of code that is probably still under contractors copyright, or other kinds of licenses.
The difference between BSD and GPL in one sentence.
Why on earth they'd base it on Fedora where Ubuntu or Alpine is the most common use ? It just adding friction and incompatibilities to most users use case
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The “extinguish” part refers to your competition, not to your own product. You embrace a popular open standard, add new features to your software that build upon the standard (but are proprietary), then watch as your competitors die off because customers become locked into your proprietary features. Similar to how Apple hijacked SMS to add iMessage and introduced all kinds of features and the blue/green bubble stylin…
to be fair to apple one time, RCS is terrible
Also, iMessage kind of sucks too. There are many better messaging apps.
The problem is that many people in the US never even try those. They just see that Androids have green bubbles and cause problems due to SMS.
More like Microsoft's first non Microsoft Azure distro.
No it's not. It's for tuned for Azure. Nobody is running this outside of their compute environment.
I was curious to see what it would be like to run this under WLS. I'm guessing we'll get our chance at some point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, a general purpose distro would come with a desktop environment and you'd be able to run it on your PC as your main OS. Calling this general purpose is so misleading. Of course describing reality in titles would have the inconvenience of causing fewer clicks to these articles. The title on HN could be updated though.
It's general purpose in that it can run any Linux application in numerous different ways, containerized, as a VM, or on specific bare hardware. You and Microsoft are using the word "general purpose" to mean different things. This is not generally compatible with different hardware. Nor does it include things that could be considered applications, like desktop environments etc. It's not designed to be run by an end us…
> Here is a general purpose Linux distribution, give it a try!
Where does your mind go? That this is a server-only distribution meant for a specific provider? Or that it's something like Debian, that could be run on servers and desktops alike without much tinkering, or meant for any provider?
FWIW, Microsoft themselves don't seem to call this a "general purpose Linux distribution", I could probably guess why, what Microsoft themselves say is "Purpose-Built for Azure" which sounds much more accurate. https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/linuxandopensourceb...
I think the author might have confused (unintentionally or intentionally, who knows?) "general purpose" with "Purpose-Built for Azure", since Microsoft's own announcements get this right, while submission article is littered with this mistake.
call me old fashioned isn't a general purpose OS one that runs on any hardware and set up? and is certified with hardware vendors for full backing and support? all this says is: "MS now provides a unified Linux from WSL to the MS cloud. just like what you got w/ SUSE RH canonical up to now. but without any support outside the MS stack.", right? or am I missing something?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's general purpose in that it can run any Linux application in numerous different ways, containerized, as a VM, or on specific bare hardware. You and Microsoft are using the word "general purpose" to mean different things. This is not generally compatible with different hardware. Nor does it include things that could be considered applications, like desktop environments etc. It's not designed to be run by an end us…
Someone says: > Here is a general purpose Linux distribution, give it a try! Where does your mind go? That this is a server-only distribution meant for a specific provider? Or that it's something like Debian, that could be run on servers and desktops alike without much tinkering, or meant for any provider? FWIW, Microsoft themselves don't seem to call this a "general purpose Linux distribution", I could probably gues…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Someone says: > Here is a general purpose Linux distribution, give it a try! Where does your mind go? That this is a server-only distribution meant for a specific provider? Or that it's something like Debian, that could be run on servers and desktops alike without much tinkering, or meant for any provider? FWIW, Microsoft themselves don't seem to call this a "general purpose Linux distribution", I could probably gues…
Ubuntu server distributions are definitely general purpose.
"General purpose" Linux distributions (not "server") typically would include a GUI desktop.