Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

pedrocr.pt

171–180 of 421 posts

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#171
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...but, so far as I can tell, they’re not doing this. I wonder why not? Because maybe, just maybe, they're a tad bit less evil?

Nonsense, a publicly traded corporation is inherently an immoral psychopath. They are required to single-mindedly pursue shareholder profit.

The people who make up the corporation are people. They need to be motivated, and they no not mobilize immediately.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AD will be gone in the 2030 timeframe. Kerberos can’t survive in untrusted networks, and products like Azure AD and Okta are far more profitable, especially since the license that pays for AD (ie windows, even for Linux clients), is required anyway!

AD is mostly used internally on corporate networks. Why would untrusted networks be relevant?

As corporate datacenters migrate to the cloud, the distinction between internal and external will fade.

Additionally, with cloud email/office becoming the standard, there’s powerful levers to incentive cloud adoption and shifting of compliance standards.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People don't use Linux Desktop because it is bad. Constantly looking for others to blame (Microsoft, DRM, Google, Valve, Apple, etc) doesn't change that fact. The fact that Google has been able to take the Linux kernel twice and produce a better and more popular desktop experience (with Android and then Chromebook) should be a good indication of that. Linux Desktop is exclusively designed for Linux developers, it is…

> People don't use Linux Desktop because it is bad. People do you Linux Desktop because it is great. I do. > The fact that Google has been able to take the Linux kernel twice and produce a better and more popular desktop experience (with Android and then Chromebook) should be a good indication of that. In what way is Android or Chromebook better than, say, Debian or Ubuntu on desktop? > Linux Desktop is exclusively d…

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#174
Microsoft loves Linux ... On the Azure Cloud. And nothing else. This strategy was only discussed in this context and nowhere else I assume.

So do not interpret more in it than what is said. Microsoft earns money. What does not earn Money is not supported.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#175
post #84

The author misses the bigger picture completely. Microsoft used to see Linux as competition, and while that might still be true in some ways, it’s largely moot for a couple of reasons. In 2019, Windows isn’t competing with Linux for desktop market share not because Linux poses no threat there, but because the desktop doesn’t matter anymore . Windows, and the desktop operating system as a concept, is competing with th…

Since when? That's nonsense. Browser and a whole operating system are two different things

You're talking to SV web devs who's careers depend on and are entirely focused on web tech.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the author refers at the fact you release just a bit of functionality for Linux but if you want the full stack you have to use Windows. Like you make .Net for Linux but only some parts, release other tools but not the admin part etc. I would be convinced when MS and Wine project has an agreement so the Wine devs can access the Windows source code.

> I would be convinced when MS and Wine project has an agreement so the Wine devs can access the Windows source code. This is exactly what I'm saying is absurd. Microsoft isn't EEE-ing by not giving Wine devs access to Windows source. There is a difference between not helping and actively sabotaging. Conflating the two is an unfair attack.

They are different attacks. They're not EEE-ing by not giving Wine devs access; they're maintaining the applications barrier to entry.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#177
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...but, so far as I can tell, they’re not doing this. I wonder why not? Because maybe, just maybe, they're a tad bit less evil?

Nonsense, a publicly traded corporation is inherently an immoral psychopath. They are required to single-mindedly pursue shareholder profit.

I don't think that's true. They are required to pursue what the shareholders deem important. That's usually profit, but sometimes there are votes to sway the company in a different direction. As a simple example of this, activist investors have spurred change in some industries that wasn't purely based on profit.[1]

1: https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Activist-Investor...

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm the average joe is already using google drive rather than office et al. Works on linux and mac better than the office stack works on windows.

Average student is using Google Docs and Drive but the office workers I hear are driven by corporate culture, and traditional places of work like accounting offices haven’t culturally embraced these kinds of solutions.

Things is like publisher, illustrator, etc. can replace word. Open office is respectable. But all the google docs champions need to wake up.

Google docs is absolutely inferior in its power, formatting options, display performance, ability to write mathematical equations and diagrams directly into the document, etc.

Every time I had to produce a non-trivial report in google docs I grind my teeth and end up rendering these things elsewhere and insert them as png.

Additionally, google docs gives you no ownership over the software or the files I find it's commercial model unsettling.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#179
post #27

When I had to deal with Windows 10 recently I got the impression MS has given up on Windows completely. The last notable improvements were introduced in Win XP. Most stuff that came later was just changing the look&view of a few settings windows with the only effect that all consistency was lost and Win looks more like a mess than a Linux desktop where some apps were built for X, Kde, Gnome, ... It was also funny tha…

Quite a few really good things came after XP. The new display[0] and sound[1] driver models, the new network[2] stack.

[0] Compositing, no longer need to reboot to install new video drivers [1] Centralized per-application volume control [2] VLAN tagging and bridging without third party products

Sadly, the thing with the new settings panels and mobile-ified look & feel is true. But that was all post-7.

> It would be interesting if there were any developers working on anything but cloud at MS the past 10 years.

There are, unfortunately, and they're terrible and keep pushing broken Windows updates and new features nobody asked for.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#180

Microsoft loves Linux because it makes them money. I'm not sure why anyone would expect differently. They won't release products like Office for Linux (though a web interface is possible), and they won't move away from Windows-only APIs. Neither of those actions would have any tangible benefit for the primary users of those produts (Windows users and Windows developers, respectively). Active Directory is so deeply in…

>Microsoft loves Linux because it makes them money. I'm not sure why anyone would expect differently. I rather thought the point of the article was that Microsoft didn't actually love linux but pretended that it did to stave off irrelevance in markets where linux is kicking their ass (i.e. server). As he said, if they really loved linux and this isn't just another "embrace, extend, extinguish" ploy sugarcoated in PR…

None if the examples given are particularly sensible.

Turn Word into a webapp? This has been happening for years, but no web editor can offer even 50% of the functionality offered by Word. Office365 is competitive with GSuite.

Drop Win32? That's basically asking Microsoft to commit suicide and destroy all companies who rely on windows to run their software. They were trying to get people to move to UWP, and look how hard that has been.

Port DirectX? Maybe, don't know. Given that Unity and Unreal both support OpenGL, Metal, Vulkan, and they are available on Windows, would this make any difference?

Post reply on HN