Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft's Linux Kernel

github.com

81–90 of 532 posts

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes everyone knows where it came from, but the FOSS communities continued screeching and pot banging with that phrase and Microsoft is both tired, played out, and near pointless considering what Google is actively doing to the software world right now.

Dismissing legitimate concerns as screeching is pretty lame. Try making your your arguments without emotional manipulation. Microsoft was a bad actor and leopards rarely change their spots. Edit:Forgot to mention the classic whataboutism.

Thankfully, at least in this case, the same is not true for companies. When the highest level of leadership changes, its quite likely that the company, itself, will change as well.

With competent leadership, Microsoft has found a new business model which is working well for them without trying to control the direction of the entire industry. We've got other big players, now, that are far more concerning to me.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed... It is Google now that does the extinguishing...

You know, it's funny. The browser world becomes a Chrome mono-culture and all the SV devs throw a fit, rightly, about the lack of competition. Then they turn around and cheer about the idea of Windows becoming just another chromium... er, sorry, Linux distribution.

The SV devs helped Chrome reach where it is.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#85
post #6

My brain threw an exception when I read this title. Awesome that this is a reality though. Now that we have a Linux kernels running and accessible on both Windows and Chromebooks I feel like we can finally say: 2019 actually is the year of Linux on the desktop. It's not a meme anymore, it's finally just a true statement. Edit: To those questioning if this really counts as Linux on the Desktop. Yes, I understand what…

Despite the wording I don't think that is the original definition? The idea is to make Linux viable as a desktop operating system, and whatever comes with that. Not running Linux as an application on another desktop. Which is almost the opposite as in leveraging capabilities outside of Linux.

Maybe more importantly redefining the goal isn't helping Linux much. I remember everyone raving about Android, but now look at the lack of vanilla graphics drivers for embedded platforms.

That said, I have nothing against WSL.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#86

I wish Microsoft would release their own linux-based OS with a compatibility layer to let me run Windows apps. I'm not overly impressed with the direction Apple is going but I really enjoy a *nix-native environment too much to go back to vanilla Windows. It would change the math a lot for me if it was full-blown linux under the hood.

Disclosure: I work at Microsoft but not on Windows (and my work machine is a MacBook Pro FWIW) WSL 2 is a lot like that -- it's a VM in the sense that it uses Hyper-V, but it's super lightweight. And in fact, when WSL 2 is enabled, both Windows AND Linux are running in the same type of VM (separate, obviously), so it's near-native performance in a lot of ways. There are still some I/O issues that the team is actively…

I'm nervous about WSL 2. I use WSL at home quite a bit and I'm on the Fast Insider ring. My PC hasnt been able to boot Win10 for over a year with virtualization support enabled in my BIOS. No errors or anything, just hangs at boot. Ive left feedback in the hub, but crickets. Don't know what the problem is. It used to work, but at some point an update broke it. Not bleeding edge hardware, either. About a 4 to 5 year old PC. Intel i7 CPU, think it's an X79 chipset (not at the computer, so cant verify). Its just weird...

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#87
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real advantage is that, if all of the applications are written for linux, one day, society may notice that the binary blob is vestigial/removable.

What if the next windows kernel was based on Linux/POSIX and it had VMs to run legacy windows programs?

It's a theory and nothing more but I hope very much Windows 11 will be named W-11 and be just a really accessible Linux that looks and acts like Windows but will have the Linux kernel underneath the fluff. Maybe CMD.EXE could even be re-worked into a shell for compatibility with BATs, and Microsoft could work with Wine to make a perfect version that could work with any Windows binary. Far-fetched and barely plausible but a boy can dream.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#88
post #85
post #6

My brain threw an exception when I read this title. Awesome that this is a reality though. Now that we have a Linux kernels running and accessible on both Windows and Chromebooks I feel like we can finally say: 2019 actually is the year of Linux on the desktop. It's not a meme anymore, it's finally just a true statement. Edit: To those questioning if this really counts as Linux on the Desktop. Yes, I understand what…

Despite the wording I don't think that is the original definition? The idea is to make Linux viable as a desktop operating system, and whatever comes with that. Not running Linux as an application on another desktop. Which is almost the opposite as in leveraging capabilities outside of Linux. Maybe more importantly redefining the goal isn't helping Linux much. I remember everyone raving about Android, but now look at…

Given that drivers are Linux's biggest problem, isn't there benefit to leveraging Windows drivers and then running Linux on top of that virtualized hardware?

I don't see why you couldn't run x11 in the window manager with the new Linux kernel in Windows.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#89
post #54
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so microsoft's open source linux kernel is going to cause everyone to stop using linux...?

No, not everyone is going to abandon Linux; I'm going to define Linux in this context as the traditional Linux desktop where people run some sort of X11 or Wayland window manager or desktop environment on top of a Linux kernel running on bare hardware. However, it would be interesting to see what impact the popularity of WSL will have on Linux desktop environments such as KDE, GNOME and its derivatives MATE and Cinna…

They already did it the moment they started migrating to OS X to develop UNIX based software.

Microsoft just realized that those devs actually don't care about Linux as such, they just want POSIX like features, otherwise they would be helping OEMs that still try to sell Linux based systems.

Re: Microsoft's Linux Kernel

#90

All the Linux with none of the freedom. Yaaaay?

To be fair, plenty of people care more about the "Linux" than they do about the "freedom" part. Case in point: macOS. Basically everything that makes it "macOS" is proprietary, but it gained popularity because it was mostly Linux-compatible. Unix compatibility is worth quite a bit on its own, Linux wouldn't have gotten half as far without it. And Unix is historically proprietary and closed-source.

> And Unix is historically proprietary and closed-source

"Unix" the brand name, maybe, but "Unix" the source code less so. BSD was based on Unix. The story of why Linux became popular instead of BSD is that BSD was mired in a copyright fight with AT&T over that relationship at the time.

Per http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/taoup/html/ch02s01.html who was active at the time (and before he became today's wingnut)

"It would take another two years and the great Internet explosion of 1993–1994 before the true importance of Linux and the open-source BSD distributions became evident to the rest of the Unix world. Unfortunately for the BSDers, an AT&T lawsuit against BSDI (the startup company that had backed the Jolitz port) consumed much of that time and motivated some key Berkeley developers to switch to Linux.

> Code copying and theft of trade secrets was alleged. The actual infringing code was not identified for nearly two years. The lawsuit could have dragged on for much longer but for the fact that Novell bought USL from AT&T and sought a settlement. In the end, three files were removed from the 18,000 that made up the distribution, and a number of minor changes were made to other files. In addition, the University agreed to add USL copyrights to about 70 files, with the stipulation that those files continued to be freely redistributed. -- Marshall Kirk McKusick

The settlement set an important precedent by freeing an entire working Unix from proprietary control, but its effects on BSD itself were dire. Matters were not helped when, in 1992–1994, the Computer Science Research Group at Berkeley shut down; afterwards, factional warfare within the BSD community split it into three competing development efforts. As a result, the BSD lineage lagged behind Linux at a crucial time and lost to it the lead position in the Unix community."

Post reply on HN