Ubuntu on Windows

I believe at this point microsoft does not have the critical mass to create an app-store. There is not enough momentum. Only Linux, Android and Apple have successful appstores. If microsoft allows debian package manager, it can bring back a lot of developers back to windows. Still there are many companies that still use windows desktops and laptops.

There is potential to evolve this into a microsoft app-store that is compatible with ubuntu. That would be a win-win for microsoft and may potentially boost sales and slow down the decline of their OS.

1. "A multi-billion dollar corporation with almost an omni presence on the desktop computer was seeing it was missing something that was readily available with other competing solutions, and decided to nitpick the greatest parts of those competitors and incorporate it in their own solution. If you can't beat 'em join 'em strategy."

2."Computing and software is becoming more fluid, and an OS doesn't have clear boundaries as it used to have but it is just made up of whatever the best ideas are, ideas that are expressed by software and thus interconnect via API's and can be glued together to make the best possible solution to fit your needs. And that big multi-billion dollar company wants the best solution."

(If you like that last idea, I have news for you. This is exactly the idea behind GNU/Linux, and it already exists. So you know, instead of being excited and giddy for all this you could just install Ubuntu.)

And this is where the sticky part is. The openness of GPL software makes way for their current Microsoft approach, but it also bites itself in the butt. By using bash in such a way and incorporating this Free and Open software within this closed OS is suffocating the ideas of GPL and diluting its purpose. Because Microsoft is not GPL-ing its own code base (sure, small parts), it's just using the best parts and sticking to its own strategy. It's a smart, clever, and tactically strong move and it will be very successful. But GPL thrives and exists because of other GPL software, and this approach works and creates beautiful things (take how GCC made may for Linux, which made way for a gazillion other tools etc.). There is a viral aspect to the GPL that will be completely cut off. I believe GPL software in a non-GPL environment have a harder time in reaching their potential.

But most people will just look at it from a user perspective and think: 'hey, I get best of both worlds'. But they forget that this software only got this far because of exactly this license. It's a fundamental and integral part of it's success.

Since what's happening was completely unheard throughout the 90's and 00's I don't think both sides would have guessed this would ever happen. But it did. Just like a couple of weeks ago Microsoft decided to create its own Linux version to support SQL server on Linux. So even stranger things might happen and I'm trying to keep an open mind.That being said I really think the nature of software is and should be fluid and so it should be able to be stitched together to create what you need. But this only work really well, if all parts of the 'quilt' follow the same rules.

It's not the best desktop environment out there, but apart from desktop, linux is the most popular system at every step from small embedded systems to the most powerful supercomputers. That wouldn't be the case if it couldn't make hardware available in a reliable and efficient manner.