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

The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux

techrepublic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 112 posts

Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux

#61

Post by ninkendo »

pessimizer wrote: post #59
swsieber wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, the reason I like OS X over a random linux distribution is the sane keyboard shortcut defaults - CMD+C and CMD+V just work everywhere, as well as things like CMD+W. Well, almost everywhere. And CTRL+F is still a little wonky depending on the app you're in.

Where on Linux do Ctrl-c, v, and x not work? I haven't had a problem with them anywhere in a decade. I have largely stuck to Gnome2, MATE, and XFCE, though.

The problem with Ctrl C is that it is also the shortcut for SIGINT when the terminal is focused.

Also most terminal emulators will forward all Ctrl combinations directly over the TTY rather than capturing them in the windowing system, so in practice Ctrl-V rarely works in a terminal either. Likewise for Ctrl-W, which is typically bound to backwards-kill-word, etc.

The way it ends up in practice, shortcuts involving the Command key on OSX end up being clearly defined and consistent, because apps typically can't override them.

Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux

#62

Post by _lce0 »

swsieber wrote: post #47
larrik wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You talk like developing on Linux means doing everything in the command line. *nix UX is nothing to be ashamed of, and I personally prefer it over Windows and OS X (especially OS X).

Personally, the reason I like OS X over a random linux distribution is the sane keyboard shortcut defaults - CMD+C and CMD+V just work everywhere, as well as things like CMD+W. Well, almost everywhere. And CTRL+F is still a little wonky depending on the app you're in.

For me it's the other way.

In Linux there's a clear separation of CTRL for sending messages to the app --ALT for commands-- and SUPER for messaging the OS.

I found OSX very confusing trying to mix everything into a single key.

Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux

#63

Post by timlyo »

pessimizer wrote: post #59
swsieber wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, the reason I like OS X over a random linux distribution is the sane keyboard shortcut defaults - CMD+C and CMD+V just work everywhere, as well as things like CMD+W. Well, almost everywhere. And CTRL+F is still a little wonky depending on the app you're in.

Where on Linux do Ctrl-c, v, and x not work? I haven't had a problem with them anywhere in a decade. I have largely stuck to Gnome2, MATE, and XFCE, though.

As a die hard Linux fan, I'll admit that it'd be nice if ctrl+left/right worked the same everywhere.

On most editors it moves me one word, on the command line it inserts the control characters.

Same story for ctrl+backspace and ctrl+a.

Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux

#64

Post by j_h_s »

pessimizer wrote: post #59
swsieber wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, the reason I like OS X over a random linux distribution is the sane keyboard shortcut defaults - CMD+C and CMD+V just work everywhere, as well as things like CMD+W. Well, almost everywhere. And CTRL+F is still a little wonky depending on the app you're in.

Where on Linux do Ctrl-c, v, and x not work? I haven't had a problem with them anywhere in a decade. I have largely stuck to Gnome2, MATE, and XFCE, though.

You need ctrl+shift+c and ctrl+shift+v, etc. in a terminal.

Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux

#65

Post by [deleted] »

pessimizer wrote: post #59
swsieber wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, the reason I like OS X over a random linux distribution is the sane keyboard shortcut defaults - CMD+C and CMD+V just work everywhere, as well as things like CMD+W. Well, almost everywhere. And CTRL+F is still a little wonky depending on the app you're in.

Where on Linux do Ctrl-c, v, and x not work? I haven't had a problem with them anywhere in a decade. I have largely stuck to Gnome2, MATE, and XFCE, though.

[deleted]

Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux

#66

Post by cinquemb »

badsock wrote: post #53
dbgm wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do I keep rolling my eyes everytime I go on hacker news? Microsoft providing more free tools in their suite is nothing but nice. It certainly won't do any harm to OSS.

The Greeks providing us with this free giant horse statue is nothing but nice! Microsoft has acted unethically from it's inception until just recently when they've been backed into a corner. For decades they've repeated shown that they're willing to damage the entire industry if it means that they end up with more control over it. Why would you trust that this recent change of heart is permanent given that their hand…

I did some recon at their office in cambridge last night, and it was just too funny to listen to the words out of their evangelists/devs/data scientists mouths, its like they are trying to appeal a caricature of what they think people on the FOS(software/silicon) community want to work on/for lol Sadly they'll attract a lot of desperate college students just chomping at the bit to work for them lol

note: (behavior not unique to $msft, same is true of $aapl, $goog, $fb and those who want to emulate such…)

Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux

#67

Post by ohnomrbill »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #16
ohnomrbill wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like your approach sometimes. When dealing with people, I find it best to take positive changes in behavior at face value. I'm sure people could hang their past behavior over their head and treat them as though nothing has changed, but that seems sociopathic. Judging people more harshly based on past behavior is a pretty good way to keep yourself from harm, though. If it weren't unfair to others I would consider do…

well the thing is - Microsoft isn't a person, it's a company - as a general rule it is reasonable to assume that companies don't do anything out of the goodness of their hearts, when you also have a good deal of bad behavior in the past ( and 20 years ago can be the recent past for a company) it might make sense to keep an increase sense of skepticism.

That's exactly my point. With people, assume they can change for the better; with companies, judge them primarily by their bad actions.

Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux

#68

Post by stormbrew »

theboywho wrote: post #49

GNU is like Leonardo DiCaprio few years ago; never getting the Oscar. Microsoft did not bring Linux to Windows, it brought GNU. Linux is a kernel and there is not even a single bit of it in what microsoft brought to windows. It's technically GNU/Windows.

No. Just no. GNU on Windows has existed for a long time in several forms, for one thing. For another, by bringing a compatibility layer for the Linux kernel they have opened the door to much more than just GNU, and it remains incredibly reductivist to claim that that's all the Linux kernel does. You can use the Linux kernel (or this linux-compatible layer) to use a GNU system or a completely non-GNU system if you so choose.

What they bring by default as a user-land is Ubuntu, which is actually a complete OS that happens to include both GNU and Linux and many many other things, including essential components that are not part of either project. I say actually a complete OS because, in spite of RMS' protestations to the contrary in the famous "It's GNU/Linux, stupid!" editorial, the GNU system was not "almost finished" when the Linux kernel came along and is still not "almost finished" even today.

And the reason it's not almost finished is because the GNU project considers the kernel unimportant, which they prove wrong every year HURD remains a mess that moves forward with the pace of a snail.

Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux

#69

Post by Delmania »

theboywho wrote: post #49

GNU is like Leonardo DiCaprio few years ago; never getting the Oscar. Microsoft did not bring Linux to Windows, it brought GNU. Linux is a kernel and there is not even a single bit of it in what microsoft brought to windows. It's technically GNU/Windows.

First, the whole GNU/Linux "debate" is nothing more than RMS's ideology getting in the way. Linux refers to a class of operating systems that are mostly POSIX compliant. The fact that the GNU project has implemented a lot of the tools used in most distribution does not mean is has the right to lay claim to the title anymore than the Apache Foundation or Python Software Foundation.

Second, the GNU project will never get the Oscar because the FSF is incredibly inept at spreading it's message.

Re: The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux

#70

Post by emehrkay »

ctvo wrote: post #9

There is a large group of people on the internet who never let the Microsoft of the 90s go. How does every single one of their business decisions get linked to some nefarious goal? The author doesn't even know what it could be, BUT DON'T FORGET! This company tried to patent everything decades ago! Don't forget they're not bringing bash to Windows out of the goodness in their hearts!

Common theme: build an empire by whatever means necessary, "why you bringing up old shit?" when asked about it
Post reply on HN