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

Ubuntu on Windows

blog.dustinkirkland.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

711–720 of 933 posts

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#711

Post by vbernat »

Someone wrote: post #470
Delmania wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Yea, I think they are going after developers who use OS X because it is UNIXy It's a bit more than UNIXy, (the proper term is Unix-like), it literally is UNIX. It meets the UNIX 03 specifications . Also, the motivations for these move predate the rise in popularity of Apple. For years, one of the biggest complaints about Windows was the lack of a good command line interface. There was the legacy CMD.EXE, which provi…

"the reality is these tools work just fine. There's never been a reason to evolve them." On the contrary; there have been many valid reasons to evolve them, but backward compatibility was deemed more important. Example #1: it is possible to write a sh/csh/bash/?sh script that handles file names with spaces, slashes, quotes, question marks, etc, but one would hope that would be made a bit easier, almost half a century…

Many shells enable you to change the way word splitting is done. By default, zsh doesn't do word splitting at all for variables.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#712

Post by chinpokomon »

narrator wrote: post #697
1024core wrote: post #675

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's called "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish". They also tried to do this with Java, but people were alert.

They tried to do it with Java but Sun wrote a really good contract and filed and won a multi-million dollar lawsuit against them for trying to fragment the platform.[1] [1] http://www.cnet.com/news/sun-microsoft-settle-java-suit/

There are two entirely different narratives there when you view Java. Microsoft's implementation was a better, faster, and fully compliant JVM with what Sun was making. An application written for Sun's implementation ran on Microsoft's. This was before Swing, and Microsoft added extensions that allowed you to write Windows Forms applications using this new and upcoming language. Windows Forms applications would not run on Sun's implementation.

Sun argued that Microsoft was intentionally breaking compatibility, but the other side was that Microsoft was actually exposing more developers to the fledgling language and providing a GUI that felt native to the rest of the OS. When Swing finally came out, it felt like you were running under CDE. That made me avoid running or writing Java applications for years.

In a lot of ways, Android repeated the exact same thing. Dalvik applications won't run in the Oracle JVM.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#713

Post by creshal »

badminton1 wrote: post #707

While I encourage people to embrace open source tools and libraries as much as possible, I also would like to issue a word of caution on feeling too comfortable targeting a proprietary environment such as Windows. Some people have compared Mac OS X and Windows because of their proprietary nature, but one key difference is that you don't run Mac OS X as a server operating system or on the cloud. While many people deve…

And people should also take a long look at Silverlight, XNA, and all the other technologies Microsoft dropped on a whim and left developers relying on them to hang dry; before they decide to bet on Microsoft SFU 4.0 "This Time For Reals" Edition.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#714

Post by chinpokomon »

supertastic wrote: post #422
takeda wrote: post #233

Surprised I don't see anyone else mentioning this. This looks to me like typical Microsoft strategy that they utilized a lot 25 years ago. 1. when not leader in given market, make your product fully compatible with competitor 2. start gaining momentum (e.g. why should I use Linux, when on Windows I can run both Linux and Windows applications) 3. once becoming leader break up compatibility 4. rinse and repeat Happened…

Even more surprised that no one seems to recall that they did exactly this back in the day. There was a version of the NT4 kernel that could run Unix programs. "Great, the program selection of Unix with the stability of windows!" people sneered, but still there was a market for it.

It was still a little different. It isn't just about building the tools and making them run. It is the environment that comes with it so you can follow any number of recipes you find online to get your development environment up and running. For all the support work I've done in the past, or finding ways to virtualized Linux in a Windows environment (or vice versa), this will be a welcome addition.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#715

Post by broodbucket »

badminton1 wrote: post #687
more_original wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2. start gaining momentum (e.g. why should I use Linux, when on Windows I can run both Linux and Windows applications) Remember OS/2 2.x? It could run Windows 3.x binaries, including GUI programs. The result was that noone wrote programs for OS/2. Windows programs would run both on Windows and on OS/2, so why write another one for OS/2? Why should anyone port Linux programs to Windows now? Just write for Linux and…

That same phenomenon sort of happens with WINE. Many software just suggests you: run it under WINE, so they just focus on Windows. Not that I am against WINE. I think it allows me to just ditch Windows entirely. I run StarCraft II on WINE 1.9 at a higher framerate than what Windows provides. That was probably the only reason I would use Windows for.

Out of curiousity, do you use wine-staging and the CSMT patches?

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#716

Post by badminton1 »

takeda wrote: post #233

Surprised I don't see anyone else mentioning this. This looks to me like typical Microsoft strategy that they utilized a lot 25 years ago. 1. when not leader in given market, make your product fully compatible with competitor 2. start gaining momentum (e.g. why should I use Linux, when on Windows I can run both Linux and Windows applications) 3. once becoming leader break up compatibility 4. rinse and repeat Happened…

Some brief history refresher:

Apple + Microsoft "collaborating" on Macintosh software = Windows

IBM + Microsoft "collaborating" on OS/2 = the NT kernel, Windows NT

Sybase + Microsoft "collaborating" on Sybase SQL server = MS SQL Server

Sun + Microsoft "embracing" Java = .NET Framework

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#717

Post by j4kp07 »

more_original wrote: post #667
takeda wrote: post #233

Surprised I don't see anyone else mentioning this. This looks to me like typical Microsoft strategy that they utilized a lot 25 years ago. 1. when not leader in given market, make your product fully compatible with competitor 2. start gaining momentum (e.g. why should I use Linux, when on Windows I can run both Linux and Windows applications) 3. once becoming leader break up compatibility 4. rinse and repeat Happened…

> 2. start gaining momentum (e.g. why should I use Linux, when on Windows I can run both Linux and Windows applications) Remember OS/2 2.x? It could run Windows 3.x binaries, including GUI programs. The result was that noone wrote programs for OS/2. Windows programs would run both on Windows and on OS/2, so why write another one for OS/2? Why should anyone port Linux programs to Windows now? Just write for Linux and…

Because Microsoft, then and now, has more active developers.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#718

Post by creshal »

badminton1 wrote: post #687
more_original wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2. start gaining momentum (e.g. why should I use Linux, when on Windows I can run both Linux and Windows applications) Remember OS/2 2.x? It could run Windows 3.x binaries, including GUI programs. The result was that noone wrote programs for OS/2. Windows programs would run both on Windows and on OS/2, so why write another one for OS/2? Why should anyone port Linux programs to Windows now? Just write for Linux and…

That same phenomenon sort of happens with WINE. Many software just suggests you: run it under WINE, so they just focus on Windows. Not that I am against WINE. I think it allows me to just ditch Windows entirely. I run StarCraft II on WINE 1.9 at a higher framerate than what Windows provides. That was probably the only reason I would use Windows for.

TeamViewer, e.g.; their official Linux version is simply the Windows build with a bundled WinE. As a result, it has a horrible UX, making me even less likely to pay their outrageous license fees.

It's a lose-lose situation in cases like this.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#719

Post by ajdlinux »

badminton1 wrote: post #687
more_original wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2. start gaining momentum (e.g. why should I use Linux, when on Windows I can run both Linux and Windows applications) Remember OS/2 2.x? It could run Windows 3.x binaries, including GUI programs. The result was that noone wrote programs for OS/2. Windows programs would run both on Windows and on OS/2, so why write another one for OS/2? Why should anyone port Linux programs to Windows now? Just write for Linux and…

That same phenomenon sort of happens with WINE. Many software just suggests you: run it under WINE, so they just focus on Windows. Not that I am against WINE. I think it allows me to just ditch Windows entirely. I run StarCraft II on WINE 1.9 at a higher framerate than what Windows provides. That was probably the only reason I would use Windows for.

I doubt any game developer decides not to release a Linux version purely because "oh, Wine exists".

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#720

Post by creshal »

badminton1 wrote: post #716
takeda wrote: post #233

Surprised I don't see anyone else mentioning this. This looks to me like typical Microsoft strategy that they utilized a lot 25 years ago. 1. when not leader in given market, make your product fully compatible with competitor 2. start gaining momentum (e.g. why should I use Linux, when on Windows I can run both Linux and Windows applications) 3. once becoming leader break up compatibility 4. rinse and repeat Happened…

Some brief history refresher: Apple + Microsoft "collaborating" on Macintosh software = Windows IBM + Microsoft "collaborating" on OS/2 = the NT kernel, Windows NT Sybase + Microsoft "collaborating" on Sybase SQL server = MS SQL Server Sun + Microsoft "embracing" Java = .NET Framework

Canonical + Microsoft "including" Ubuntu = Microsoft Xenix 2016?
Post reply on HN