Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS

Post by voltagex_ » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 3:34 PM UTC

buffoon wrote: post #76

breakingcups wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, I'm currently making nearly the exact same switch, albeit on a smaller scale. I'm currently in charge of a lot of old ASP.NET applications but for the new flagship thing we're looking at ASP.NET 5 on Linux on Azure (BizSpark), Go where it makes sense performance-wise or problem-wise and possibly Postgres instead of SQL Server, although I'm not sure on that last bit yet.

The last bit we're doing it because we got financially fucked by the core licensing changes in SQL 2012.

Post by debacle » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 3:36 PM UTC

Aldo_MX wrote: post #87

debacle wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GPL is a cancerous license, and Ballmer had to trash open source. That was their business model and they were using the OSS association against Novell. Edit: For those of you downmodding me for saying that the GPL is a cancerous license, please understand that this isn't a negative connotation - it's simply an aspect of the requirements of the license. It's very likely a good thing, and part of the reason that Li…

The GPL is not a cancerous license, if I would use a negative adjective to describe it, it would be: misused . I understand when people wants to keep making FOSS better by releasing entire projects with a GPL license, but I don't understand when people release simple stuff such as a code example with a GPL license...

Post by david-given » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 3:43 PM UTC

avian wrote: post #89

david-given wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interix. Microsoft's Unix. It runs on the NT kernel alongside win32 as another process personality. Most windowses come with the Interix core, and you can get the userland part from Microsoft --- it's called Services For Unix these days, I think. It even comes with GCC. It's a pretty nice piece of work, behaving just like an old school Unix. But it's largely been abandoned by Microsoft and is buggy as hell and diffic…

Interesting. I didn't know they had a replacement after they dumped the POSIX kernel personality in Windows XP. Wikipedia says that "Interix will not be included in Windows versions after Windows 8" though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interix

Post by dalke » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 4:01 PM UTC

cbd1984 wrote: post #78

dalke wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first Unix I ever touched was Microsoft's Xenix. Wikipedia says MS first released Xenix in 1980.

For a while, Xenix was the best-selling Unix under the sun. (But not the Sun. It ran on commodity 16-bit IBM PCs.) ((I refuse to resist puns. They just flow through me.))

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 4:03 PM UTC

ChrisArgyle wrote: post #70

drnewman wrote: post #24

Don't know anyone's ages here, but is anyone fascinated by the historical implications of this? I started using Linux in the 90's and the talk in the community at the time was "world domination". It seems to me that's happened--more or less behind the scenes, but it's happened.

I couldn't disargee more about Microsoft's current place in tech markets. They've lost quite a lot of weight since their 800lb gorilla days in the 90s. They used to exploit their dominant market position to replace de-facto standards with their own: kerberos "extensions", creating ActiveX instead of just implementing NPAPI, removing JNI from the MS JVM. But they can't do that any more. They lost too much ground under…