Ubuntu on Windows • Hacker News Board

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#841

Post by tingol » Thu, Mar 31, 2016, 3:47 PM UTC

uxp wrote: post #282

13of40 wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I grew up a Windows user, and switched to OS X because of the unix-like command line environment that more closely matched the servers I was working with in my job environments. Out of curiosity, why would you not just go with a Linux desktop for that?

I'm not who you asked, but because I like to spend my day debugging my terrible code, not my desktop. Before you ask, yes I do have a Linux laptop (Acer C720P ChromeBook, unlocked with Debian + Gnome), and with all the sudden issues that pop out of seemingly nowhere (my latest dragon is a recurrent kernel module crash that can fill my disk up with .core files in 10 minutes), I've switched back to a 13" rMBP. Though,…

Measuring Linux maturity by chromebooks is silly though. It's a hack. Linux on bare metal works really well these days. Especially if you use a machine that has linux in mind (ie dell xps).

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#842

Post by recursive » Thu, Mar 31, 2016, 3:48 PM UTC

riotdash wrote: post #751

recursive wrote: post #731

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is pretty user-hostile. Moreso than MS in my estimation. Try changing the battery in your iphone, or getting music on it without using itunes.

Is this a troll or are you serious? :D

Serious.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#843

Post by wvenable » Thu, Mar 31, 2016, 3:54 PM UTC

homulilly wrote: post #421

icc97 wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree conhost is terrible - but they have finally made some improvements in Windows 10 [1]: - Drag-to-resize - Automatic text reflowing on resize - Ctrl + X/C/V support for cut/copy/paste - Selection that does line-wrapping - Transparency - A full-screen mode [1]: http://futurice.com/blog/a-saner-windows-command-line-part-1

Ctrl+Key shortcuts aren't going to work in bash (at least not without breaking other important stuff) so I'm hoping they decide to make quickedit mode more usable someday. Unfortunately I still think this is going to be kind of a shitshow as long as they keep the black box nature of conhost. The terminal apps OSX and most linux distros ship with are fairly bare-bones too and I doubt reprogrammable 256-color mode is o…

"I doubt reprogrammable 256-color mode is on microsoft's roadmap..."

http://www.nivot.org/blog/post/2016/02/04/Windows-10-TH2-%28...

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#844

Post by zzzcpan » Thu, Mar 31, 2016, 3:56 PM UTC

gooseyard wrote: post #828

can someone confirm whether this is derived from MSR's Drawbridge research? ( http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/drawbridge/ )

No, the whole thing was created from scratch. Linux processes even live in a separate address space and are not showing up in a task manager at the moment. At least that's what they said. You should watch both videos posted here somewhere.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#845

Post by neves » Thu, Mar 31, 2016, 3:56 PM UTC

How do I get it? I want it now!

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#846

Post by SudoNhim » Thu, Mar 31, 2016, 4:36 PM UTC

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…

Winners and losers from my perspective: - Linux CLI beats Windows CLI - hopefully I can go the rest of my life without learning to use Powershell or cmd.exe. If anything this cements rather than undermines my preference to use Linux on embedded devices and webservers. - Windows desktop environment beats Linux environments. I'm now less likely to use Unity/GNOME/KDE in my desktop OS, because, while they are ok, they were never one of the reasons I used Linux for my desktop.

I'm not sure which OS this helps/hurts more in the long run, but I know I'm happy.

Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft (double disclaimer: but I'm almost fresh out of university)

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#847

Post by sebringj » Thu, Mar 31, 2016, 4:47 PM UTC

Now if they can just run XCode, we are on to something.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#848

Post by reitanqild » Thu, Mar 31, 2016, 4:50 PM UTC

badminton1 wrote: post #769

hydromet wrote: post #765

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes partycoder, it sure would be interesting to hear what "neckbeard" RMS has to say about this move by Microsoft today, would it not?

I think he has a full fledged beard making him not fit into the neckbeard type. RMS was foresighted enough to make licensing a core part of open source. I have a deep respect for the man. The Achilles heel for open source software remains to be patents. In that regard I think many proprietary players still have the upper hand.

The Apache License helps in this regards as far as it is used, doesn't it?

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#849

Post by tw04 » Thu, Mar 31, 2016, 4:57 PM UTC

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…

What's the benefit of breaking up compatibility? What's the end-game there? The whole point of this, beyond allowing developers to develop without having to run a VM, is to allow *nix apps to run on Windows. If they break that compatibility... people will just ditch Windows. They don't care about the OS, they care about the apps that run on top.

Re: Ubuntu on Windows

#850

Post by mavhc » Thu, Mar 31, 2016, 4:58 PM UTC

cturner wrote: post #803

supertastic wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

But that was a whac-a-mole, probably for getting boxes checked for whatever it is that audit departments did before sarbanes oxley. That they've gone with linux here shows that their focus is mainstream developers. Consider - it their main focus here had been EEE then BSD would have been a far better starting point. The GPL is far more restrictive than the BSD license. The one major area where linux wins over BSD is…

http://brianreiter.org/2010/08/24/the-sad-history-of-the-mic...