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

Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 225 posts

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#191

Post by qwerty456127 »

overgard wrote: post #187
qwerty456127 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but no actual “why” Because in every other aspect but the very kernel (and the UI perhaps) Windows is a disaster. Windows Update especially.

Arguably windows was much more of a disaster 10+ and 20+ years ago in the XP and 95 eras. I have trouble seeing microsoft give up something they've invested 30ish years on without a really obvious reason.

At least it didn't spend hours on applying mandatory updates just to stop working completely in the XP and 95 eras. When I was using Windows XP I ran Windows Update once in some months and everything worked perfectly.

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#192

Post by qwerty456127 »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #185
qwerty456127 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't. Replacing the kernel doesn't but deprecating the entire OS and switching to GNU/Linux + Wine (which means MS would start contributing to Wine) does. If this happens we can get heavily improved Wine + vendors like Adobe releasing Linux-native versions of their apps.

I still don't get it. There's nothing wrong with the kernel, the crap is stuff that they've put on top of the kernel just like it is in Linux. You're giving up the best part of the OS and replacing the worst part with a compatibility layer, why not keep the NT kernel and use a compatibility layer? Since MS has all the code and it wouldn't have to be open source, that'd be much easier.

> just like it is in Linux.

Quite the opposite: the only thing that is (hell arguable, of course) wrong with Linux is its kernel architecture.

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#193

Post by pjmlp »

monocasa wrote: post #183
pjmlp wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It certainly did not improve sales. I bet no one that downloaded it has spent a dime to Sun.

> It certainly did not improve sales. It was a free download for decades before being open sourced. From what I heard, it increased support contract sales quite a bit, letting companies feel that that weren't necessarily tied to Sun for Solaris, but knowing that Sun was the best outfit to support it. > I bet no one that downloaded it has spent a dime to Sun. You would lose that bet hard. They made their money on hard…

I was talking about software sales and apparently those hardware sales weren't enough to keep Sun in business.

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#194

Post by TingPing »

gambiting wrote: post #184
crispinb wrote: post #10

I'd like to use linux, and install it from time to time, but am always eventually worn down by problems, some trivial & some less so, that could mostly be solved, but at the cost of research & fiddling time I'm not interested in spending. The issues largely fall into two categories - missing software, and missing or undercooked hardware support. If Microsoft did signal to the market an increased long-term support for…

Yep. My problem is always the same - lack of documentation and transparency for the desktop side of things. Example - I installed latest ubuntu on my laptop. Few days later, I needed to share my internet connection from wifi to ethernet. Ok, no problem, I'll just google it. Answer says it's easy as anything, you just open the connection manager, tick two boxes and done. Except....on latest version of ubuntu, the conn…

I'm sure you don't care but interface names were redone to be stable, as in if you have two ethernet cards or you replace one with another you don't end up in a situation where `eth0` today is `eth1` tomorrow just because of random chance timing during init.

https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/Predictabl...

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#196

Post by Endy »

Zardoz84 wrote: post #145
justinclift wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... the practices of Linux/Unix devs who have little or no respect for the past Maybe some Linux devs, but many Unix devs have been around a long time and are pretty insistent on backwards compatibility too. ;)

shit... There are some Unix software from 80's that runs unmodified on modern Linux. You only need to recompile it.

Having to "recompile" it means that it's not unmodified, though. Unmodified would mean that it runs like Windows programs where the same binary files work now as did then.

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#197

Post by monocasa »

pjmlp wrote: post #193
monocasa wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It certainly did not improve sales. It was a free download for decades before being open sourced. From what I heard, it increased support contract sales quite a bit, letting companies feel that that weren't necessarily tied to Sun for Solaris, but knowing that Sun was the best outfit to support it. > I bet no one that downloaded it has spent a dime to Sun. You would lose that bet hard. They made their money on hard…

I was talking about software sales and apparently those hardware sales weren't enough to keep Sun in business.

> It was a free download for decades before being open sourced.

And it was always the support contracts even more than the hardware sales that kept them going. Starting to nickel and dime for software licenses too wasn't an option on the table for them.

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#198

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #192
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still don't get it. There's nothing wrong with the kernel, the crap is stuff that they've put on top of the kernel just like it is in Linux. You're giving up the best part of the OS and replacing the worst part with a compatibility layer, why not keep the NT kernel and use a compatibility layer? Since MS has all the code and it wouldn't have to be open source, that'd be much easier.

> just like it is in Linux. Quite the opposite: the only thing that is (hell arguable, of course) wrong with Linux is its kernel architecture.

I could not possibly disagree more strongly. Linux's kernel has some problems but it is mostly ok. Userspace is where everything has gone horribly horribly wrong in Linux.

Re: Could Microsoft release a desktop Linux?

#199

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

Ari_Ugwu wrote: post #13
simonblack wrote: post #3

I suggested on Mini-Microsoft about 10 years ago that Microsoft do an 'Apple'. Apple took a free OS from BSD and put their own GUI over the top of it. I suggested that MSFT do the same sort of thing, that being to put their Windows GUI on top of the Linux OS instead of using the Linux X11 GUIs. This had the advantage that the underlying OS base would no longer need maintaining by Microsoft, and all their coding effor…

For the longest time I assumed MS would buy Ubuntu. I'm not a .NET dev currently running PopOs on my XPS 13. VS Code is my primary editor for all things. If MS released a desktop that looked this good and came batteries included for their tool chains and services I'd hop in a heart beat. My only guess is that doing so would lower consumer confidence in the corporate space? I know Chrome books are making a push there…

> For the longest time I assumed MS would buy Ubuntu.

Microsoft was apparently one of the candidates that was in talks to buy Red Hat.

https://www.businessinsider.com/red-hat-deal-talks-with-amaz...

According to the article, they eventually dropped out because of anti-trust concerns.

Post reply on HN