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

The Linux kernel hidden inside Windows 10

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 166 posts

Re: The Linux kernel hidden inside Windows 10

#151

Post by kartickv »

fsloth wrote: post #123
kartickv wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Besides, Astoria will lead to a second-rate UX for Windows Phone (WP) as Android apps on WP are coded as per Android UX guidelines, not WP UX guidelines. If Microsoft is building a framework, I'd expect it to provide a great UX for their users. If a compatibility layer is required, it would be better for MS users to have it in the reverse direction, to let WP apps run on Android, and use that to try to convince devs…

I don't think average user cares as much about uniform UX experience as they would from just being able to use the app. Example: Pokemon GO uses totally it's own UX on iOS and Android and that does not seem to harm it's popularity. I would claim 'nice ux' is something that would not drive market adoption nearly as much as other factors (value, usability in general, etc).

I haven't played Pokemon Go, but it's fine for apps to use their own custom theme. What's not fine is to use one OS's theme on another OS, like an Android app on WP.

I see where you're coming from when you say that nice UX is not the most important thing, but a poor UX comes in the way of usability. The conventions users are used to no longer work, which comes in the way of using the app for its intended purpose. UI that doesn't fit might also cause users to pause and reorient themselves, again distracting them from their goal.

For example, wall switches in India are on when pressed downward, as opposed to upward in the US. Either works, but if the switches are different from room to room in your house, it's confusing.

Re: The Linux kernel hidden inside Windows 10

#152

Post by fuzzfactor »

cmdrfred wrote: post #24
allendoerfer wrote: post #12

I wonder how much further humankind would have progressed by now if "because it can be done" were not such a big motivation for intelligent people. Edit: Since everybody took this post seriously, I will, too: We would be closer to some local maxima, but would have no chance to progress beyond them.

The biggest motivation for me is when people tell me that it can't be done.

Not a motivator for me, but not a deterrent. Some of my best accomplishments were regarded as less than possible by the majority of other operators.

Sometimes the intersection of "because it can be done" & "the most that can be done with the resources within reach" can be applied in the most problem-solving of ways.

Haven't tried the Linux in W10 yet, but at least have gotten DOS to boot to bare metal on a modern PC from a GPT-structured HDD reliably with less monkey business than ever.

Re: The Linux kernel hidden inside Windows 10

#155

Post by ericfrederich »

vvanders wrote: post #7

Fun tidbit is it seems the original reason behind this was Android support in WinPhone10 but when that was axed they migrated it to Ubuntu on desktop. If true that's a pretty nifty pivot.

One of the videos I watched on their blog they mentioned this ability has been here since NT. They said something like "we just brushed the dust off of it and it worked".

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/wsl/

Re: The Linux kernel hidden inside Windows 10

#156

Post by int_19h »

acqq wrote: post #122
int_19h wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels to me that, with the kernel emulation in place, a third party can now step in to provide reasonable Android emulation on top of that. I mean, unless Android uses kernels with some custom syscalls, it should be usable, right? Now it's a question of recreating the userspace on top of that. I would imagine that many pieces would just fall in naturally, while others (most things to do with UI) would probably req…

But do the potential users on the PC really need anything more than https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlueStacks or http://www.androidauthority.com/best-android-emulators-for-p...

They probably don't, but I suspect that using WSL would significantly improve performance. In fact, it's probably one of the existing vendors of products like BlueStacks that will eventually do so.

Re: The Linux kernel hidden inside Windows 10

#157

Post by rogerbinns »

microtonal wrote: post #110
rogerbinns wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding #1 that is mashing together two separate products into 1. (I worked for SCO.) The history is that Microsoft were producing Xenix - a port from AT&T. Eventually they decided to stop doing that work themselves as DOS, OS/2, Lan Manager and similar were of interest. (Note though that they ran their email infrastructure on Xenix - it was part of their operational business.) Xenix was handed over to a father and…

Heck Caldera only really wanted OpenServer. Why did Caldera only want the more dated OpenServer? Did they plan to provide consulting services to existing OpenServer users?

The reason why SCO was successful was because of how it is used. Imagine it is 1991 and you have a dentist's office you want to computerise. You go to a local VAR (value added reseller) and they would come in and install a complete solution. It would consist of a Compaq "server" ($5k), several terminals, com port cards for the server, a tape backup system, and some dental office management software. Oh and a $1,000 copy of SCO Unix. The VARs typically marked up what they sold by 15%, which is how they got paid. Two related bits of trivia - at one point the only software that existed for managing pet cemeteries ran on SCO OpenServer. And most McDonalds (I believe US only) had OpenServer in each branch.

By the late 90s SCO had 15,000 of these VARs. Caldera wanted to essentially substitute Linux for OpenServer into that setup, and make $1,000 per copy of the OS rather than $25. The VARs realised they could supply Linux themselves which is why Caldera had no traction doing that, and doubled down on SCO OpenServer and the existing installed base. Hence the company rename too - it was all SCO products.

UnixWare was touted as Enterprise ready. It did multi-processor well, had sophisticated filesystems (Veritas), could do clustering (Non-Stop) etc. But at the time most who wanted "big" Unix went to one of the RISC vendors each of whom had their own Unix. If they wanted to go Intel (which wasn't credible until the Pentium Pro) then the competition was Windows NT.

Re: The Linux kernel hidden inside Windows 10

#158

Post by rogerbinns »

kragen wrote: post #99
rogerbinns wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding #1 that is mashing together two separate products into 1. (I worked for SCO.) The history is that Microsoft were producing Xenix - a port from AT&T. Eventually they decided to stop doing that work themselves as DOS, OS/2, Lan Manager and similar were of interest. (Note though that they ran their email infrastructure on Xenix - it was part of their operational business.) Xenix was handed over to a father and…

Thank you for clarifying! Were you around when stuff moved over to Caldera? Were there SCO people who moved to Utah, or who became Caldera employees in California? My condolences on having had such a shitty thing happen to such a beautiful company. I don't ever remember SCO Unix being a particularly great Unix, but it was pretty solid, and the company was awesome; it's a place I would have been proud to work if I'd h…

I was around during the transition but I'd always been on the Tarantella side (I was an architect of the product) and so didn't work on the Unix side directly. Heck our division customers were overwhelmingly running Solaris with Linux picking up in the 2000's.

The Unix side of the business was rapidly shrinking. 1999 was a banner year because everyone had to go out and upgrade their operating systems so they could claim y2k compliance. 2000 was the end of a tech bubble, and also saw a tech downturn. This lead to drastically reduced sales. Throw in Linux getting increased adoption (remember that IBM promised to spend $1 billion on it which gave a lot of credibility), and that SCO's UNIX products no longer had particularly relevant sweet spots in the market.

I don't know of anyone who moved to Utah. The people in California became part of Caldera but I don't know exactly how that was legally structured. Also SCO had folks all over the US and world. At the peak it was ~1,100 employees and $250m annual revenue.

SCO was a good company and many people liked working at the company because they liked many of their colleagues. Employee turnover was quite low because of that. It also had bad points, but what doesn't?

SCO Unix (OpenServer specifically) was great but not from a technological viewpoint. However the vast majority of users were not techies - they were dentists, receptionists, pet cemetery workers etc. OpenServer came by default with a gui that let those regular folk get things done in a friendly way. See my sibling comment about why Caldera wanted OpenServer.

And SCO did have some firsts. It was also very good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. It was the first company to offer Internet in a Box. You installed the system, and now were on the Internet (as a server). We were the first to ship a browser (licensed Mosaic). We shipped by far the most copies of Netscape. At one point Pizza Hut started allowing orders over the Internet. It was more of a proof of concept rather than massively used and widespread. But SCO was behind that too.

Re: The Linux kernel hidden inside Windows 10

#159

Post by fapjacks »

rodgerd wrote: post #103
fapjacks wrote: post #63

Honest question: What's the deal with this stuff? I'm not interested in the reasoning that it's done just because they can do it. I mean... Why not just ... use Linux ? I suspect it's a comfort zone thing, and most people really don't want to move out of their comfort zone (and especially programmers have a hard time admitting this). I understand people developing for the platform, but I don't understand people devel…

> I mean... Why not just ... use Linux? Linux as a subsystem of Windows gives me a much better story as far as hardware compatibility and software than the other way around.

If that's what you have to tell yourself, I guess.

Re: The Linux kernel hidden inside Windows 10

#160

Post by bitmapbrother »

satysin wrote: post #27
vvanders wrote: post #7

Fun tidbit is it seems the original reason behind this was Android support in WinPhone10 but when that was axed they migrated it to Ubuntu on desktop. If true that's a pretty nifty pivot.

Indeed, and the rumours are that Project Astoria worked too well which scared Microsoft. If Android apps "just worked" on Windows then why would developers bother using their new Universal Windows Platform.

>Indeed, and the rumours are that Project Astoria worked too well which scared Microsoft. If Android apps "just worked" on Windows then why would developers bother using their new Universal Windows Platform.

This is categorically false. You only need to visit the windows phone reddit to see all of the complaints on how poorly implemented it was, how it affected the performance of the phone and the app compatibility issues.

Microsoft's attempt to put Android apps on windows phone and their harebrained idea to replace Google services with their services, within the app, were all failures and not because it would have cannibalized their native apps, but rather they just couldn't pull it off.

Post reply on HN