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

Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

pedrocr.pt

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 421 posts

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#391

Post by himinlomax »

rectang wrote: post #293
himinlomax wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Google Docs word processor objectively sucks, it's barely a rich text editor. To wit, you can't even define custom styles!

And both Word and Google Docs pale in comparison to LaTeX for demanding customization work. But "barely a rich text editor" suffices for the vast universe of documents which barely need rich text. Except when your target market is captured by network effects and demands a particular file format regardless of how appropriate it is for the material.

The lack of custom styles is really problematic for a very common use case, documentation. I'd rather use Markdown for the purely tech stuff, but I thought I'd use Docs for collaborating with non or less technical people. That just doesn't work, too tedious.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#392

Post by aiCeivi9 »

dredmorbius wrote: post #315
frankohn wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And to me, how could they anyway, I can't find "a Linux desktop". There are many, which one would they port to? This was the very reason that prevented Google to release Google Chrome for Linux.

Sarcastic or ignorant?

Both. GP knows Chrome for Linux exists but ignores that its need for auto-update doesn't play well with distros package management and it also statically-links or ships 3rd party libs. Clearly supporting diverse (fragmented) linux ecosystem is not easy at all.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#393

Post by fps_doug »

oaiey wrote: post #319
giancarlostoro wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would it be too crazy to think Microsoft could one day adopt Linux as their core for their OS though? They could probably implement the Win32 API as an API for a distro much like Wine does (but much better and from scratch) and keep those portions proprietary. This allows their OS to run on more platforms than Windows ever has. Much like how Edge is now Chromium based. Nothing is stopping them from making Linux serve…

That is crazy. Because NT is an excellent kernel done by a industry legend (David Cutler). It runs on 80%+ of all desktop, is the grid below a cloud platform, is a game console and has a track record of being flexible enough to run on microcontrollers, phones, etc. And the complete hardware industry supports it. There is no reason to switch to Linux, considering that they would need to reinvent the whole UI stack of…

Agreed. I did a lot of reading about the NT architecture 10+ years ago purely out of interest, and it's pretty amazing. And I'm saying this as a Linux person.

The only reason Linux is so successful is actually the fact that it's open source. For individuals (like me) because that gives you much more flexibility in customizing the system, tinkering with it, and more importantly, debugging problems and understanding inner workings.

But even for big corps (which are mostly running the show when it comes to Kernel dev these days) it's much easier to whack the Linux kernel into shape for whatever you want to achieve, than trying to work with Microsoft to get what you want from NT.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#394

Post by Kipters »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #299
smacktoward wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They won't release products like Office for Linux Because the market for desktop Linux applications is too small to be worth considering. The whole reason they "love Linux" now is because Linux on the server gained too much market share for them to realistically oppose. They had to find a way to make money in that market that didn't involve somehow boiling an ocean of Linux machines. So they did. Windows is still o…

Would it be too crazy to think Microsoft could one day adopt Linux as their core for their OS though? They could probably implement the Win32 API as an API for a distro much like Wine does (but much better and from scratch) and keep those portions proprietary. This allows their OS to run on more platforms than Windows ever has. Much like how Edge is now Chromium based. Nothing is stopping them from making Linux serve…

> They could probably implement the Win32 API as an API for a distro

They did, that's how SQL Server runs on Linux

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#395

Post by bakuninsbart »

jacquesm wrote: post #291
at-fates-hands wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because the market for desktop Linux applications is too small to be worth considering. I would also add in there are other open source options that are compatible and work well with MS Office now. Libre Office and Open Office are two such examples. I can now write my resume in either or and save it in a docx format, send it to a recruiter and then they can open it with MS Word without any issues.

The bigger competitor for Word and the rest of the office suite is not Libre or Open Office but Google Docs. It's cross platform and does away with local file storage, which is a security risk and a data loss risk.

The only thing they NEED to improve is version history comparison. I do not understand why it is so hard to "save" a version of a file before you make your own changes, so that others then can easily see what you changed.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#396

Post by devnonymous »

tw04 wrote: post #317
devnonymous wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everytime I hear someone say "just look, they don't support office on Linux!" I ask: and what exactly do you think the market share is of guys who love Linux so much they use it on the desktop, but also would PAY Microsoft for Office vs. just using LibreOffice or Google's office suite? If you think MS hasn't done the math and figured out that solution would never break even much less turn a profit, I guess I'd ask…

>Are you claiming that desktop linux would not have been adopted by enterprises if they could get the same document render and be editable exactly the same manner irrespective of the vendor software being used ? I am ABSOLUTELY claiming that. No legitimate enterprise is going to roll-their-own Linux desktop. They're still going to want a centralized directory server tied into their mail server as well. So now they ne…

> I am ABSOLUTELY claiming that

Oh well, I disagree with you on that then. However, irrespective of how we feel it could have turned out, the fact remains that Microsoft deliberately pushed for standardization of a document format which at the time of standardization did not have a complete reference implementation even by Microsoft itself !!

They could have simply adopted the ODF format (still can if then want to) but chose not to.

The funny thing about this discussion is, seeing things a different way, it is me who is saying MS had the foresight/business acumen to see how a standard they control can lead to lock in/dependence of their platform and you're dismissing that with claiming their reasoning was a simplistic 'ah, nobody will pay us for that, why bother'.

In any case, my initial (and I suspect the OPs) assertion is valid --

MS has had a long dirty history. I am not opposed to giving them the benefit of doubt but it is way too little, and way too early to do this right now.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#397

Post by [deleted] »

caspper69 wrote: post #364
excursionist wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The non-technical among us, the 80-90% if you will, are not going to use a desktop Linux distribution the way they are currently setup. A home user is not going to use Google to fix a problem. They're not going to call their technically-inclined family member. They're not going to edit text files nor understand the minutiae of their hardware (and it WILL happen, eventually, 100% guaranteed). They are either going t…

> Is this basement-dweller fantasy something you have personal experience with or is it just a story you like to tell to make yourself feel better about your own technical ignorance and laziness? As an embedded developer with over 20 years in industry and nearly that many with GNU/Linux (and a whole host of other UNIX systems), I say piss off with that. Who exactly do you think you are that you can be so incredibly p…

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#398

Post by excursionist »

caspper69 wrote: post #364
excursionist wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The non-technical among us, the 80-90% if you will, are not going to use a desktop Linux distribution the way they are currently setup. A home user is not going to use Google to fix a problem. They're not going to call their technically-inclined family member. They're not going to edit text files nor understand the minutiae of their hardware (and it WILL happen, eventually, 100% guaranteed). They are either going t…

> Is this basement-dweller fantasy something you have personal experience with or is it just a story you like to tell to make yourself feel better about your own technical ignorance and laziness? As an embedded developer with over 20 years in industry and nearly that many with GNU/Linux (and a whole host of other UNIX systems), I say piss off with that. Who exactly do you think you are that you can be so incredibly p…

> Who exactly do you think you are that you can be so incredibly presumptuous?

Says the guy grouping the entire Linux community under 'crusty 50 year old basement dwellers'. And your '20 years in the industry' means nothing to me, if you're trying to impress me you failed.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#399

Post by excursionist »

caspper69 wrote: post #365
excursionist wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They call an 800 number to get help or send it back. So they either attempt to get a solution from the same kind of service you get by buying a commercial linux desktop (or just the support), or they 'send it back' - which was exactly your complaint about Linux. You're contradicting yourself. > That, right there, was exactly what the person was responding to. It was actually a question regarding the need to tell ta…

> It was actually a question regarding the need to tell tales about 'crusty basement-dwelling kids now in their 50s'. What was the point of that other than to make yourself feel better? I told the story. And it is a relevant one. There is an element in the community, not as pervasive as it once was, but it is not insignificant, that is and behaves exactly as I set forth. And I know it to be true, just as you do, and…

> And I know it to be true, just as you do, and every other person here on HN knows it to be true. I lived through it. That "attitude" is one of the major things holding back Linux on the desktop. Sad, but true.

Maybe you should stop assuming your anecdotal experience is representative of the entire community.

Re: Microsoft's “Love” of Linux

#400

Post by caspper69 »

excursionist wrote: post #398
caspper69 wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is this basement-dweller fantasy something you have personal experience with or is it just a story you like to tell to make yourself feel better about your own technical ignorance and laziness? As an embedded developer with over 20 years in industry and nearly that many with GNU/Linux (and a whole host of other UNIX systems), I say piss off with that. Who exactly do you think you are that you can be so incredibly p…

> Who exactly do you think you are that you can be so incredibly presumptuous? Says the guy grouping the entire Linux community under 'crusty 50 year old basement dwellers'. And your '20 years in the industry' means nothing to me, if you're trying to impress me you failed.

Well, your reading comprehension is what impresses me the least. You presumably read all of my comments and still typed that. I'm not sure how, because it is a direct contradiction to what I said.

It's a bit challenging to have a discussion with someone who responds to what he thinks you said, rather than what you did say.

Post reply on HN