Lol, what about just using Linux.
photoshop, muscle memory in that order
[deleted]
Windows Subsystem for Linux on Windows Server
31–40 of 67 posts
Re: Windows Subsystem for Linux on Windows Server
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
I only see value for Windows as a desktop OS, and I think the intent of WSL is improving the dev experience on Windows. If you need a high quality Linux server, why not just run Linux?
For the same reason people use OS X to actually develop applications that will actually run on GNU/Linux.
I don't know why you are being down voted. I switched to OSX to get the sweet NIX underbelly years ago and while not everyone* uses OSX for linux deployments... many, many developers do.
Re: Windows Subsystem for Linux on Windows Server
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
NT has had support for "personalities" since its inception. This is not even the first *NIX one it has had :) Still, I agree that it's an impressive achievement.
Except WSL has little in common with traditional NT personalities. Traditional NT personalities were a false good idea, and have been a failure in the long term, especially to run Unix workloads -- however this jugement is easy with insight -- when it came out traditional NT personalities were quite interesting.
No idea about code commonality, but the broad architecture of WSL is basically the same as the original POSIX personality from the 90's. The "foreign" process runs in a special mode and handles a different set of system calls via a different dispatch mechanism in the kernel, but still on top of the same set of kernel functionality beneath that.
Re: Windows Subsystem for Linux on Windows Server
#34I'm particularly eager to see WSL allow GPU pass-through so I can use PyTorch without a VM or dual-boot on my work computer.
Re: Windows Subsystem for Linux on Windows Server
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
I came here to wonder the same. Is the key word in this sentence "cannot" or "currently"? Do they to force win32 to continue to be a viable server platform, by forever restricting reliable Linux daemons, or do they eventually want to allow Windows to be a viable Linux server?
They want it to be a viable POSIX server. The majority of web applications use languages with runtimes that hide any Linux specific features. Given that the majority of enterprises allow only for Windows desktops, and won't pay for OS X machines, this is an appealing path to Ruby, Python, Erlang, Java, .NET Core, ... server based applications on azure cloud deployments.
I doubt they want POSIX ever again.
They want 'me too' POSIX-enough Developer workloads right up to the Deploy phase, where they have are building cushy, hard-to-evade on-ramp to Azure.
Re: Windows Subsystem for Linux on Windows Server
#36I've been using WSL on Windows 10 since it's release. I'd love to know the inside story of how it came to be. A lot of companies would never try something like this. For me WSL has worked as perfect as could be expected, nothing failed to run that I need yet. The gaps are being slowly closed (e.g. executing between WSL/Windows). I no longer have to develop in a VM, nor be forced to use a Mac just because it has "unix…
Well, I'd love to use it if the I/O would improve. At the moment I just use Cygwin instead.
Re: Windows Subsystem for Linux on Windows Server
#37I am not even joking. In the next few years we are going to see Linux on the desktop!
See, as much as it's a meme at this point, this is really where the GNU/Linux distinction is important. WSL is really GNU/Windows which is probably horrifying and a massive success story for the FSF.
Can you clarify the GNU/Linux distinction with regard to the WSL? I mean... isn't the main WSL layer a flavor of Ubuntu?
Re: Windows Subsystem for Linux on Windows Server
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
this is not the first time microsoft has done this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Services_for_UNIX one could even argue they are somewhere between the embrace and extend phase.
It's a risky move to embrace your competitor's platform. Once this tech matures will people prefer SSH to RDS/WinRM? Will people write software for IIS or will they use WSL to deploy their Apache/Nginx config? When enterprisey software starts shipping with a WSL requirement will admins decide to move to Linux where their software is a 1st class citizen? Why would you choose to be Windows native when its much easier t…
My company is windows based. The IT department run a bunch of VM's running Linux. But it is always treated as a black box appliance. The admin expertise is still heavily based on the windows stack. I think this tech will make it easier to deploy those sort of appliances on Windows, without needing much Linux admin ability. Windows will compete at a higher level with deployment systems rather than the OS itself.
Re: Windows Subsystem for Linux on Windows Server
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
I only see value for Windows as a desktop OS, and I think the intent of WSL is improving the dev experience on Windows. If you need a high quality Linux server, why not just run Linux?
Because a lot of enterprises running Linux are running some kind of "enterprise Linux" e.g. Red Hat, Ubuntu Advantage, SUSE Linux Enterprise, where purchasing an "enterprise Linux" allows for support contracts etc. If you imagine WSL for Windows Server not as competition for CentOS and Debian, but as competition for "enterprise Linux", then you can have a compelling sales case for enterprises which are already heavil…
As far as I know, WSL is "Ubuntu on Windows", so wouldn't this be a conflict of interest? Maybe they would simply work out a deal to pay a royalty to Canonical or something. Wouldn't that be poetic.
I think it would be really interesting if MS competed in that space. But 'nix sysadmins don't want to worry about maintaining a Windows instance concurrently with their server instances (assuming the only facilities they need are what 'nix provides). Microsoft having Windows attached to their Linux distribution is a net negative, in my opinion.
Edit: Formatting
Re: Windows Subsystem for Linux on Windows Server
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
They want it to be a viable POSIX server. The majority of web applications use languages with runtimes that hide any Linux specific features. Given that the majority of enterprises allow only for Windows desktops, and won't pay for OS X machines, this is an appealing path to Ruby, Python, Erlang, Java, .NET Core, ... server based applications on azure cloud deployments.
I doubt they want POSIX ever again. They want 'me too' POSIX-enough Developer workloads right up to the Deploy phase, where they have are building cushy, hard-to-evade on-ramp to Azure.
Your argument is confusing... Can I deploy my Django app on Azure? If the answer is yes, what exactly, is "me too" about that?