161–170 of 236 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So make these apps work on Linux. They go instead inventing VMs and hypervisors to extend their walled gardens.
How does this extend their walled garden? The kernel doesn’t just accept patches willy nilly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Excel is, in and of itself, a single reason alone for many people in various industries to own or operate a computer. If computers no longer ran Excel, they would buy a dedicated Excel Machine to do it, and put it on their desk next to their computer. You can make a similar argument about Premiere and After Effects, although the fact that Resolve runs on Linux is helping the situation a little. The Autodesk products…
I know lot of people use excel, and can't live without it. Anyway, the point is that we can blame Linux for kernel or driver issues, its thousands of desktop environments for its bugs, etc, but I don't think it's fair to say that Linux "doesn't work" just because Microsoft will never release Linux versions of their desktop software. I have a working Linux desktop and I also use spreadsheets in my day to day work.
Anybody who had, as their day job, working with spreadsheets would never do it with Libre Office unless they weren't really using them with a lot of data and complexity, or (B) had a bit of a masochistic streak. (Or, I guess (C), were completely dedicated to open software - which is a fair reason I guess).
The two things that will permanently hold back Linux on the desktop (And, remember, I say this as someone who has only worked on Linux for 3+ years now) - is (A) The amazing number of inconsistencies on the desktop environment (Depending on the application, I have 3 separate ways I need to initiate a "copy" - Ctrl+C, Ctrl+Shift+C, Ctrl+Right-Click+Select copy.) and (B) The lack of most decent desktop software (Chrome, Slack excepted - they are pretty much flawless on Linux).
Bringing this back to the original thread - what I would love from Microsoft, is to make Linux a first-rate citizen on Windows. Right now it's 80% of the way their with WSL. Still missing a bunch of networking stuff, and still doesn't run cron/init and friends. But It's getting closer.
Then, we have the best of both worlds - I can do all my work in Linux, and still have access to the rich desktop environment of Windows. So - count me as one person who is really happy that Microsoft is putting effort into advancing their Linux offerings by submitting these Hyper-V support patches into the Linux Kernel.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Everyone should be afraid Please don't FUD like this. Proprietary systems on top of Linux are nothing new and Microsoft certainly isn't the first company to have done it. If you have some real proof of their business plans then let's hear that rather than encouraging speculation and fearmongering.
It's not FUD. It's the Microsoft's never-changing strategy. I don't know how many times people need to experience it to remember this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Everyone should be afraid Please don't FUD like this. Proprietary systems on top of Linux are nothing new and Microsoft certainly isn't the first company to have done it. If you have some real proof of their business plans then let's hear that rather than encouraging speculation and fearmongering.
I had to look up what FUD was (it stands for Fear Uncertainty Doubt for anyone else who didn't know) I feel like taking an extremely cautious stance in regards to Microsoft is very fair, given that they were actually hauled in front of Congress for bad practices multiple times in the past...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Everyone should be afraid Please don't FUD like this. Proprietary systems on top of Linux are nothing new and Microsoft certainly isn't the first company to have done it. If you have some real proof of their business plans then let's hear that rather than encouraging speculation and fearmongering.
It's not FUD. It's the Microsoft's never-changing strategy. I don't know how many times people need to experience it to remember this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It probably means they want to leverage out the existing open source VM software so they can make one with proprietary Windows support (at some point down the line). There is a long history of this in the past with Microsoft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis... Everyone should be afraid of this, even the Microsoft employees commenting here. Look at the 737 MAX post on the front page for ano…
>Everyone should be afraid Please don't FUD like this. Proprietary systems on top of Linux are nothing new and Microsoft certainly isn't the first company to have done it. If you have some real proof of their business plans then let's hear that rather than encouraging speculation and fearmongering.
Perhaps Microsoft is finally tired of trying to get Azure working on the Windows kernel. Or possibly they need this for ARM VM instances?
[0] https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-think-about-open-sourcing-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is not really Linux' fault though. If you all keep buying this auto-updating subscription crap you are sending the signal to the companies involved that you bought in to their view. The only way to make them reconsider is to stop using it.
No one was given the choice. Or the choice was to "upgrade" to a subscription or throw away the technical investment in the platform, starting from scratch with a new and unfamiliar and usually less capable software.
The only reason I am still using windows is MS office. I might give it a try myself... My home machine is running Arch linux and works flawlessly for more then two years already. Just my work is still stucked with a lot of documentations sharing between some other people and I need MS office programs which have no alternative in open-source word. well, the office.com looks promising these days and I hope to switch co…
What was the status of it so far in Linux?
Well, according to TFA, the patches were submitted as an RFC. Short version: it's not in Linux, this is basically the very first step in getting it into Linux, it's still gonna be probably several months at least before it makes it into the mainline kernel, and then however long after that for it to make it into your distro's kernel. FWIW, I think it was a little over 3 years from the first "RFC" for Wireguard until…