7 ms·

I think a key point that is being missed here is most of the people excited about this probably run OSX, not Linux. OSX has long been the "'Linux' for people wh

by city41 11y ago

I think a key point that is being missed here is most of the people excited about this probably run OSX, not Linux. OSX has long been the "'Linux' for people who don't really want to run Linux" (not really meant as an insult, I'm typing this from OSX right now). Apple is just as proprietary, commercial and anti-competitive as Microsoft here. FWIW, this excites me because it potentially means I can go from two machines to one, and always have IE/Edge at my fingertips. It will greatly improve my dev workflow if it pans out like people are hoping it does.

riotdash 11y ago
"Apple is just as proprietary, commercial and anti-competitive as Microsoft here." The big difference is that Apple actually doesn't fk their users in the ass. People always complain how Apple products are so expensive etc. but you know that's how they make money and they actually invest in to the privacy and security of their users (good example: the FBI case) I will happily keep on paying high price for the Apple products in the future too as long as all of my personal data is not being broadcasted to hundreds of spy servers, as long as random ads are not being slammed to my face while I'm developing and as long and I AM in the control of the OS and not the other way around. Maybe some people enjoy being slaves to MS but at least some people wanna decide THEMSELVES how their hosts-file work and when their computer should restart to install the updates. I'm sorry but Microsoft has been, is and most likely will be horrible company in the future too. Unless they completely stop this BS and start to respect their users and keep it that way I can't believe any rational developer considers MS platform as an option.
- creshal 11y ago
  > The big difference is that Apple actually doesn't fk their users in the ass. Like with their SMB support? When, given the choice of complying with the GPL or re-writing an SMB client from scratch, Apple chose the latter and subjected users to utterly broken SMB support for several releases just so they did not have to open source their pitiful collection of patches?
- recursive 11y ago
  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.
  - riotdash 11y ago
    Is this a troll or are you serious? :D
    - recursive 11y ago
      Serious.
  - creshal 11y ago
    > Try changing the battery in your iphone Try changing the battery in your Lumia.
    - johnchristopher 11y ago
      My Lumia 640 has replaceable battery. It might be a windows phone though.
      - creshal 11y ago
        Hah! You're right. Microsoft's own devices actually do all have replaceable batteries, only (most of) the older Nokia-branded Lumias have soldered batteries.
    - toxican 11y ago
      And I'll try changing it in my Nexus. We're at the point where the inability to change your battery is pretty common place on flagship phones.
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    Sure. But aren't we past changing batteries? They're less an issue than changing screens these days. And screens have never been easily replaceable. Its just us old folks who expect the battery to come out.
- eertami 11y ago
  >I will happily keep on paying high price for the Apple products in the future too as long as all of my personal data is not being broadcasted Yeah I'm sure all those celebs that had all their nude photos stolen from icloud would totally agree that Apple takes great care with personal data. Are you trying to justify needlessly spending 600$ on a phone every year? That's your prerogative, you don't have to convince strangers on the internet.
  - riotdash 11y ago
    "Yeah I'm sure all those celebs that had all their nude photos stolen from icloud would totally agree that Apple takes great care with personal data." All systems have had and still have security flaws. There is a world of difference between having a unknown vulnerability (which affects and will affect all platforms) and intentionally spying on users and stealing their information.
    - nxzero 11y ago
      All systems have flaws at some point, but not all systems equal in terms of exploitable value for the effort.
  - rdsnsca 11y ago
    Apples security was not breached, those celebrities fell for a phishing scam.
groundCode 11y ago
Pretty much this - it's going to make my life as a developer easier. Having Linux right there when I'm working on an Microsoft platform will remove a clunk in my user experience of having a VM open all the time for when I want to drop into Linux.
disagree1_ 11y ago
> Apple is just as proprietary, commercial and anti-competitive as Microsoft here. I respectfully disagree. The OSX kernel XNU is open source, as are a ton of its components. That's huge in a lot of situations. Some things - not a lot, granted, but some, like FreeBSD's C++ stack and compiler - are even upstreamed back to mainstream open source projects by Apple employees.
- akerro 11y ago
  >That's huge in a lot of situations. Some things - not a lot, granted, but some, like FreeBSD's C++ stack and compiler - are even upstreamed back to mainstream open source projects by Apple employees. ^ Citation need.
  - creshal 11y ago
    Clang/LLVM?
    - cyphar 11y ago
      The joke (I think) being that Apple doesn't upstream a lot of code.
- cmiles74 11y ago
  I agree that Apple is much more pragmatic right now. IMHO Microsoft is looking to emulate Apple in this regard: leverage open source when it makes sense, release code back to open source projects when it makes sense.
- dr_zoidberg 11y ago
  While not open source, I've seen parts of the windows source (never really had the time to read it in full detail) in my work, most probably coming from the MS vs EC situation some years back[0]. Yes, there are still hidden parts (docs mostly, I recall my friends doing memory forensics research had a "fun" time to get information on IP connection structures for example), but it's not as secretive as many people think it is. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp_v_Commission#Significance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp_v_Commission#Si...
partycoder 11y ago
Apple has contributed to key open source projects such as LLVM and WebKit. They have also open sourced Swift. They have identified the core of their business and they feel comfortable there. They get a 30% royalty for each App Store transaction, they make large profits selling iPhones and Macs. They monetize their software indirectly as a part of a larger end-to-end solution. Microsoft during their monopolic era was much more beyond that, they were going for all.
- hydromet 11y ago
  > Microsoft during their monopolic era was much more beyond that, they were going for all. Yes, absolutely. Bill Gates was not a "nice" man. These days many people fawn over him "oh he's so lovey dovey, he's going to save the world with all his money as a philanthropist". LOL -- how many have actually sat at the same table (behind closed doors) with Billy boy pounding the table telling everyone attending (ISPs, major telecoms) how Microsoft was going to run the show, run the world. Microsoft is a ruthless company. Satya Nadella was part of this ruthless culture when he first joined MSFT 25 years ago. Why would the ruthless culture of Microsoft suddenly change because they've figured out how to peg Ubuntu Linux to the kernel? Ever hear of a Trojan Horse? This announcement today sure smells like horse manure.
  - wmccullough 11y ago
    Explain to me how it could be a Trojan horse when it's their own OS that they are modifying? They aren't exactly going in and sabotaging the Linux kernel project here... There's also a logical fallacy that because Nadella worked for MS for the past twenty five years, he's as power hungry as Gates. This reeks of the type of elitist nonsense the keeps people from wanting to adopt Linux. EDIT: Removed insult, came with arguments instead.
    - timpattinson 11y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

by city41 11y ago

riotdash 11y ago

"Apple is just as proprietary, commercial and anti-competitive as Microsoft here." The big difference is that Apple actually doesn't fk their users in the ass. People always complain how Apple products are so expensive etc. but you know that's how they make money and they actually invest in to the privacy and security of their users (good example: the FBI case) I will happily keep on paying high price for the Apple products in the future too as long as all of my personal data is not being broadcasted to hundreds of spy servers, as long as random ads are not being slammed to my face while I'm developing and as long and I AM in the control of the OS and not the other way around. Maybe some people enjoy being slaves to MS but at least some people wanna decide THEMSELVES how their hosts-file work and when their computer should restart to install the updates. I'm sorry but Microsoft has been, is and most likely will be horrible company in the future too. Unless they completely stop this BS and start to respect their users and keep it that way I can't believe any rational developer considers MS platform as an option.

creshal 11y ago
> The big difference is that Apple actually doesn't fk their users in the ass. Like with their SMB support? When, given the choice of complying with the GPL or re-writing an SMB client from scratch, Apple chose the latter and subjected users to utterly broken SMB support for several releases just so they did not have to open source their pitiful collection of patches?
recursive 11y ago
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.
- riotdash 11y ago
  Is this a troll or are you serious? :D
  - recursive 11y ago
    Serious.
- creshal 11y ago
  > Try changing the battery in your iphone Try changing the battery in your Lumia.
  - johnchristopher 11y ago
    My Lumia 640 has replaceable battery. It might be a windows phone though.
    - creshal 11y ago
      Hah! You're right. Microsoft's own devices actually do all have replaceable batteries, only (most of) the older Nokia-branded Lumias have soldered batteries.
  - toxican 11y ago
    And I'll try changing it in my Nexus. We're at the point where the inability to change your battery is pretty common place on flagship phones.
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  Sure. But aren't we past changing batteries? They're less an issue than changing screens these days. And screens have never been easily replaceable. Its just us old folks who expect the battery to come out.
eertami 11y ago
>I will happily keep on paying high price for the Apple products in the future too as long as all of my personal data is not being broadcasted Yeah I'm sure all those celebs that had all their nude photos stolen from icloud would totally agree that Apple takes great care with personal data. Are you trying to justify needlessly spending 600$ on a phone every year? That's your prerogative, you don't have to convince strangers on the internet.
- riotdash 11y ago
  "Yeah I'm sure all those celebs that had all their nude photos stolen from icloud would totally agree that Apple takes great care with personal data." All systems have had and still have security flaws. There is a world of difference between having a unknown vulnerability (which affects and will affect all platforms) and intentionally spying on users and stealing their information.
  - nxzero 11y ago
    All systems have flaws at some point, but not all systems equal in terms of exploitable value for the effort.
- rdsnsca 11y ago
  Apples security was not breached, those celebrities fell for a phishing scam.

groundCode 11y ago

Pretty much this - it's going to make my life as a developer easier. Having Linux right there when I'm working on an Microsoft platform will remove a clunk in my user experience of having a VM open all the time for when I want to drop into Linux.

disagree1_ 11y ago

> Apple is just as proprietary, commercial and anti-competitive as Microsoft here. I respectfully disagree. The OSX kernel XNU is open source, as are a ton of its components. That's huge in a lot of situations. Some things - not a lot, granted, but some, like FreeBSD's C++ stack and compiler - are even upstreamed back to mainstream open source projects by Apple employees.

akerro 11y ago
>That's huge in a lot of situations. Some things - not a lot, granted, but some, like FreeBSD's C++ stack and compiler - are even upstreamed back to mainstream open source projects by Apple employees. ^ Citation need.
- creshal 11y ago
  Clang/LLVM?
  - cyphar 11y ago
    The joke (I think) being that Apple doesn't upstream a lot of code.
cmiles74 11y ago
I agree that Apple is much more pragmatic right now. IMHO Microsoft is looking to emulate Apple in this regard: leverage open source when it makes sense, release code back to open source projects when it makes sense.
dr_zoidberg 11y ago
While not open source, I've seen parts of the windows source (never really had the time to read it in full detail) in my work, most probably coming from the MS vs EC situation some years back[0]. Yes, there are still hidden parts (docs mostly, I recall my friends doing memory forensics research had a "fun" time to get information on IP connection structures for example), but it's not as secretive as many people think it is. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp_v_Commission#Significance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp_v_Commission#Si...

partycoder 11y ago

Apple has contributed to key open source projects such as LLVM and WebKit. They have also open sourced Swift. They have identified the core of their business and they feel comfortable there. They get a 30% royalty for each App Store transaction, they make large profits selling iPhones and Macs. They monetize their software indirectly as a part of a larger end-to-end solution. Microsoft during their monopolic era was much more beyond that, they were going for all.

hydromet 11y ago
> Microsoft during their monopolic era was much more beyond that, they were going for all. Yes, absolutely. Bill Gates was not a "nice" man. These days many people fawn over him "oh he's so lovey dovey, he's going to save the world with all his money as a philanthropist". LOL -- how many have actually sat at the same table (behind closed doors) with Billy boy pounding the table telling everyone attending (ISPs, major telecoms) how Microsoft was going to run the show, run the world. Microsoft is a ruthless company. Satya Nadella was part of this ruthless culture when he first joined MSFT 25 years ago. Why would the ruthless culture of Microsoft suddenly change because they've figured out how to peg Ubuntu Linux to the kernel? Ever hear of a Trojan Horse? This announcement today sure smells like horse manure.
- wmccullough 11y ago
  Explain to me how it could be a Trojan horse when it's their own OS that they are modifying? They aren't exactly going in and sabotaging the Linux kernel project here... There's also a logical fallacy that because Nadella worked for MS for the past twenty five years, he's as power hungry as Gates. This reeks of the type of elitist nonsense the keeps people from wanting to adopt Linux. EDIT: Removed insult, came with arguments instead.
  - timpattinson 11y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish