Live data from Hacker News

Arch Linux adapted for Windows Subsystem for Linux

github.com

161–163 of 163 posts

Re: Arch Linux adapted for Windows Subsystem for Linux

#161
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best software is always made by happy developers making software to make other developers happy. This also applies to Visual Studio Code.

Atom really is a nice piece of software, definitly done by happy devs. Havent tried to microsoft fork you mention yet.

VSCode isn't based on Atom in any way except being built on Electron.

Re: Arch Linux adapted for Windows Subsystem for Linux

#162
post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tried dual booting Linux back in high school, never got anywhere because I never selected it at boot. Virtual Machines changed that - I was able to play around with Linux without having to worry about a power cycle. Now I can play around Tensor flow (in theory) and not have to worry about the crummy GPU support in nearly all hypervisors. I've reached the point where I'd love to have Linux on my work machine, no Win…

my first semester of college back in 2010 I, for reasons I cannot explained, decided that I would keep my windows and linux installs on totally separate hard drives. With a laptop. With one drive bay. You never appreciate how quick rebooting into linux is until you spend 4 months physically swapping a hard drive every time you want to switch which OS you're using. I was not a smart freshman

If your laptop was able to boot from USB, perhaps you could place the second disk (the one with Linux) in an external USB 2.0 (better yet 3.0) case. That'd solve the issue...

Re: Arch Linux adapted for Windows Subsystem for Linux

#163
post #86
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think everyone is a bit split on it. We realize how accessible and empowering open source software has made things, so there's a preference to encourage that. As a kid I was curious about Unix workstations, but knew they cost $30k and I wasn't going to get access to one unless it was a university or larger company shared with other people. Only a few years later Linux was released and today I could get a computer f…

> It sucks because someone who writes an amazing tool still has to come up with a whole other business in order to make income from it. However, selling the software itself means you have to engage in a robust licensing system to defeat the pirates, which is no trivial feat (even mighty Adobe went online-as-a-service because they couldn't beat the pirates).

Well, I think you get around that by making a service-based company instead of a software-based company--that's completely separate from open source vs closed source. Unfortunately, not all businesses can be structured like that.
Post reply on HN