20 ms·

The truth comes out: Microsoft needs Linux

63 points by argorain 10y ago

Roboprog 10y ago
I don't think MS is "embracing open source" (or even necessarily rejecting it), so much as they are acknowledging that Linux servers are here to stay for a while, and simply grabbing a piece of the pie instead of ignoring it. Much like Oracle having its own Linux distro. Perhaps enough shareholders complained about a market segment simply being given to OSX (development environment for work intended for a POSIX server) that they simply had to act. No more, no less. Not benevolent or malevolent, just picking up some loose cash :-)
- Roboprog 10y ago
  Maybe they are too late, though. I still like my Mac better than Windows version N, and have largely switched from Ubuntu (formerly RedHat, formerly Slackware) to OSX at home for the family. The UI on the last few Windows versions has really confused me as to WTH they think they are doing.
  - Roboprog 10y ago
    I remember when my kids got the version of MS Office at school that came with Vista/Win7. All the complaining about Open Office / Linux stopped, as they learned that the Win XP layout was NOT God's Own User Interface.
- toomanythings2 10y ago
  Linux servers are here to stay for a while? Linux, and Unix and BSD, run 75 to 85% of the internet so that kind of thinking is just so wrong.
  - Roboprog 10y ago
    Is it too hard to imagine that "something else" might be popular in 2030? Or perhaps not. But at some point, you and I will retire (etc), and the next generation might have other preferences, or discover something insanely great that we simply aren't used to.
sickbeard 10y ago
How is it the truth if the author specifically mentions that he his speculating?
chris_wot 10y ago
I wonder what Ballmer thinks, after all he was the one who called Linux a "cancer".
- monkeyprojects 10y ago
  It may well be a cancer buts it's won the battle. Better to accept the mutation to the business model while you still can before the cancer kills it
- todd8 10y ago
  Yes and it's metastasizing.
- WorldMaker 10y ago
  I realize you are likely being rhetorical, but in case you aren't, Ballmer recently said that Linux is not a threat, and likely has not been a threat, even if he thinks that Microsoft did what it needed to do to survive at the time he called Linux a "cancer". [1] More importantly, Ballmer was not wrong in saying that Microsoft's focus as a company has been and should always be "Developers, Developers, Developers" and everything about this Ubuntu on Windows effort is for Developers. [1] http://www.reuters.com/article/us-microsoft-ballmer-linux-idUSKCN0WC2RA http://www.reuters.com/article/us-microsoft-ballmer-linux-id...
zymhan 10y ago
Did the author post this having entirely ignored all of the news and discussion about this last week? This just seems like a seriously tardy "me-too" piece.
- dave2000 10y ago
  There's just no content in that article at all.
raarts 10y ago
A possible reason for bringing MSSQL to Linux that was not mentioned in TFA at all: customers requesting it.
mikegerwitz 10y ago
The author quoted Shuttleworth: > The native availability of a full Ubuntu environment on Windows, without virtualization or emulation, is a milestone that defies convention and a gateway to fascinatingly unfamiliar territory. "Ubuntu environment" is the key there. Microsoft doesn't need "Linux" unless they're planning on replacing their own kernel with it. Microsoft here is depending on the software running atop of the kernel: in this case, the GNU operating system---which is more than just a set of GNU programs[0]---which brings all of this software together. Granted, all the talk has been primarily about GNU Bash and other GNU software.[1] Yes, they're running software compiled for the kernel Linux by providing translating system calls; they could also do that for any other kernel that hackers want to compile their software for, should it become immensely popular. But the rest of the Unix stuff is separate. [0]: https://gnu.org/gnu/gnu.html https://gnu.org/gnu/gnu.html [1]: https://www.gnu.org/software/ https://www.gnu.org/software/
- eterm 10y ago
  If we end up with fully comatible gnu/linux and gnu/windows, that's still awesome, maybe even better than ending up with only linux variants.
  - pjc50 10y ago
    Not if it's harmful to the development of a fully Free ecosystem. Unless Windows becomes fully Free - which would be a huge, unprecedented change - its users are forced to accept whatever compromises Microsoft makes on their behalf.
  - pessimizer 10y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace%2C_extend_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace%2C_extend_and_extingui... Count me as being trapped in the 90s.
ctvo 10y ago
There is a large group of people on the internet who never let the Microsoft of the 90s go. How does every single one of their business decisions get linked to some nefarious goal? The author doesn't even know what it could be, BUT DON'T FORGET! This company tried to patent everything decades ago! Don't forget they're not bringing bash to Windows out of the goodness in their hearts!
- ohnomrbill 10y ago
  I like your approach sometimes. When dealing with people, I find it best to take positive changes in behavior at face value. I'm sure people could hang their past behavior over their head and treat them as though nothing has changed, but that seems sociopathic. Judging people more harshly based on past behavior is a pretty good way to keep yourself from harm, though. If it weren't unfair to others I would consider doing it. With companies, I have no need to weigh their positive behavior more heavily. No one's feelings are at risk of being hurt; no friendships are on the line. If a company burns me with bad practices, it's safe and prudent to hold their mistakes against them. It should take a very long time for companies to build back goodwill, once lost.
  - bryanrasmussen 10y ago
    well the thing is - Microsoft isn't a person, it's a company - as a general rule it is reasonable to assume that companies don't do anything out of the goodness of their hearts, when you also have a good deal of bad behavior in the past ( and 20 years ago can be the recent past for a company) it might make sense to keep an increase sense of skepticism.
    - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
      Twenty years ago isn't "recent history" for anything in the tech industry. People who were at Microsoft back when they were "really evil" in the 90s have since WORKED AT GOOGLE (or any number of other companies you might be a fan of), and even left Google, since then. Very few people who made decisions you may be holding over them today, actually work at Microsoft today. You can legitimately hold a decision against a person for a long time... they're still the same person, more than likely. But a company is an amalgamation of it's employees. And employees come and go.
meapix 10y ago
in other words, just installing cygwin.
ausjke 10y ago
To me Microsoft has been evil long enough, instead of welcoming they "join" open source world, I'm 1000x more concerned they become a tumour and hurt the booming open source at large. Just leave OSS alone Microsoft!
- dbgm 10y ago
  Why do I keep rolling my eyes everytime I go on hacker news? Microsoft providing more free tools in their suite is nothing but nice. It certainly won't do any harm to OSS.
  - badsock 10y ago
    The Greeks providing us with this free giant horse statue is nothing but nice! Microsoft has acted unethically from it's inception until just recently when they've been backed into a corner. For decades they've repeated shown that they're willing to damage the entire industry if it means that they end up with more control over it. Why would you trust that this recent change of heart is permanent given that their hand was forced? When they start acting ethically when they don't have to - that's when I'll reconsider my position.
    - cinquemb 10y ago
      I did some recon at their office in cambridge last night, and it was just too funny to listen to the words out of their evangelists/devs/data scientists mouths, its like they are trying to appeal a caricature of what they think people on the FOS(software/silicon) community want to work on/for lol Sadly they'll attract a lot of desperate college students just chomping at the bit to work for them lol note: (behavior not unique to $msft, same is true of $aapl, $goog, $fb and those who want to emulate such…)
  - vblord 10y ago
    I can't believe you don't see the evil. Open your eyes. Just because a company pays 400 million for Xamarin and then open sources the Xamarin SDKs for Android, iOS, and Mac shouldn't fool you. People everywhere... revolt! If you can't tell, I am being sarcastic. I love Microsoft. People just believe what they want to believe. I'm sure they will never change.
ybrah 10y ago
Click bait title and speculation
devereaux 10y ago
Yes, it does. Not so much on servers or desktops, but on phones. The mobile ecosystem is in danger of becoming a iOS/Android duopoly (or already is, depending on which X you want in 9X% to say it is) I love Windows Phones. No so many apps, which is good as I don't have that much time to tweak stuff. Sensitive defaults like a black theme (!!!), a click to enable reading aloud SMS (!!), crazy battery features. They are liquidating the current WP8 line, so it's like $30 if you want to get a Lumia 640 LTE to play with for a weekend (and free unlock code if you want to keep it but don't want AT&T). It's just sad to see something that had so many good things for it go the way of the Dodo.
theboywho 10y ago
GNU is like Leonardo DiCaprio few years ago; never getting the Oscar. Microsoft did not bring Linux to Windows, it brought GNU. Linux is a kernel and there is not even a single bit of it in what microsoft brought to windows. It's technically GNU/Windows.
- stormbrew 10y ago
  No. Just no. GNU on Windows has existed for a long time in several forms, for one thing. For another, by bringing a compatibility layer for the Linux kernel they have opened the door to much more than just GNU, and it remains incredibly reductivist to claim that that's all the Linux kernel does. You can use the Linux kernel (or this linux-compatible layer) to use a GNU system or a completely non-GNU system if you so choose. What they bring by default as a user-land is Ubuntu, which is actually a complete OS that happens to include both GNU and Linux and many many other things, including essential components that are not part of either project. I say actually a complete OS because, in spite of RMS' protestations to the contrary in the famous "It's GNU/Linux, stupid!" editorial, the GNU system was not "almost finished" when the Linux kernel came along and is still not "almost finished" even today. And the reason it's not almost finished is because the GNU project considers the kernel unimportant, which they prove wrong every year HURD remains a mess that moves forward with the pace of a snail.
  - theboywho 10y ago
    You are wrong in so many ways. First of all, you are confusing "Microsoft bringing GNU to Windows" with "this is the first time GNU is brought to Windows." Then you go on to make it seem like if the GNU/Linux debate is just the craziness of some guy called RMS: wrong, many people support this distinction. Then you go off-topic talking about why GNU hurd is a mess. None of this contributes to the key topic here: Microsoft only brought GNU, not Linux and not Ubuntu. A topic where you were wrong again. Please read https://mikegerwitz.com/2016/04/GNU-kWindows https://mikegerwitz.com/2016/04/GNU-kWindows
    - JdeBP 10y ago
      ... as discussed extensively on Hacker News on its own page, including threads such as https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11459025 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11459025 .
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
CyanLite2 10y ago
Ubuntu on Windows does more to destroy OS X. It's about developers choosing Macbooks over Surface Tablets and traditional laptops with a Win10 license. If you're an enterprise running SQL Server now on Windows. You're not going to ditch your cluster to have it re-installed on Linux just to save a couple dollars on an OS license. But if you're a newbie developer fresh out of college and been doing development in a Unix-style environment (because they bought a Macbook instead of a Win8 laptop four years ago), you've probably never been exposed to a Microsoft development environment. These efforts are to capture the next generation of developers who haven't ever touched a Windows desktop and feel comfortable with writing Python on Linux and using MySQL or Oracle. Want proof? Quick, name one unicorn startup who has a Microsoft technology stack. Heck, just name anybody that's using a Microsoft development stack in Silicon Valley... Now those developers can be targeted with .NET, SQL Server, and Ubuntu on Windows. Now instead of buying the same version of that Macbook, those folks can go buy a Surface Tablet clone with the pen and touch screen (and a Windows 10 license!), and still do all of their development on a Unix-style environment. Better yet some will transition to C#, and some will even take advantage of the free-license-for-Oracle-users to switch to SQL Server.

63 points by argorain 10y ago

I don't think MS is "embracing open source" (or even necessarily rejecting it), so much as they are acknowledging that Linux servers are here to stay for a while, and simply grabbing a piece of the pie instead of ignoring it. Much like Oracle having its own Linux distro. Perhaps enough shareholders complained about a market segment simply being given to OSX (development environment for work intended for a POSIX server) that they simply had to act. No more, no less. Not benevolent or malevolent, just picking up some loose cash :-)

Roboprog 10y ago
Maybe they are too late, though. I still like my Mac better than Windows version N, and have largely switched from Ubuntu (formerly RedHat, formerly Slackware) to OSX at home for the family. The UI on the last few Windows versions has really confused me as to WTH they think they are doing.
- Roboprog 10y ago
  I remember when my kids got the version of MS Office at school that came with Vista/Win7. All the complaining about Open Office / Linux stopped, as they learned that the Win XP layout was NOT God's Own User Interface.
toomanythings2 10y ago
Linux servers are here to stay for a while? Linux, and Unix and BSD, run 75 to 85% of the internet so that kind of thinking is just so wrong.
- Roboprog 10y ago
  Is it too hard to imagine that "something else" might be popular in 2030? Or perhaps not. But at some point, you and I will retire (etc), and the next generation might have other preferences, or discover something insanely great that we simply aren't used to.

sickbeard 10y ago

How is it the truth if the author specifically mentions that he his speculating?

chris_wot 10y ago

I wonder what Ballmer thinks, after all he was the one who called Linux a "cancer".

monkeyprojects 10y ago
It may well be a cancer buts it's won the battle. Better to accept the mutation to the business model while you still can before the cancer kills it
todd8 10y ago
Yes and it's metastasizing.
WorldMaker 10y ago
I realize you are likely being rhetorical, but in case you aren't, Ballmer recently said that Linux is not a threat, and likely has not been a threat, even if he thinks that Microsoft did what it needed to do to survive at the time he called Linux a "cancer". [1] More importantly, Ballmer was not wrong in saying that Microsoft's focus as a company has been and should always be "Developers, Developers, Developers" and everything about this Ubuntu on Windows effort is for Developers. [1] http://www.reuters.com/article/us-microsoft-ballmer-linux-idUSKCN0WC2RA http://www.reuters.com/article/us-microsoft-ballmer-linux-id...

zymhan 10y ago

Did the author post this having entirely ignored all of the news and discussion about this last week? This just seems like a seriously tardy "me-too" piece.

dave2000 10y ago
There's just no content in that article at all.

raarts 10y ago

A possible reason for bringing MSSQL to Linux that was not mentioned in TFA at all: customers requesting it.

mikegerwitz 10y ago

The author quoted Shuttleworth: > The native availability of a full Ubuntu environment on Windows, without virtualization or emulation, is a milestone that defies convention and a gateway to fascinatingly unfamiliar territory. "Ubuntu environment" is the key there. Microsoft doesn't need "Linux" unless they're planning on replacing their own kernel with it. Microsoft here is depending on the software running atop of the kernel: in this case, the GNU operating system---which is more than just a set of GNU programs[0]---which brings all of this software together. Granted, all the talk has been primarily about GNU Bash and other GNU software.[1] Yes, they're running software compiled for the kernel Linux by providing translating system calls; they could also do that for any other kernel that hackers want to compile their software for, should it become immensely popular. But the rest of the Unix stuff is separate. [0]: https://gnu.org/gnu/gnu.html https://gnu.org/gnu/gnu.html [1]: https://www.gnu.org/software/ https://www.gnu.org/software/

eterm 10y ago
If we end up with fully comatible gnu/linux and gnu/windows, that's still awesome, maybe even better than ending up with only linux variants.
- pjc50 10y ago
  Not if it's harmful to the development of a fully Free ecosystem. Unless Windows becomes fully Free - which would be a huge, unprecedented change - its users are forced to accept whatever compromises Microsoft makes on their behalf.
- pessimizer 10y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace%2C_extend_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace%2C_extend_and_extingui... Count me as being trapped in the 90s.

ctvo 10y ago

There is a large group of people on the internet who never let the Microsoft of the 90s go. How does every single one of their business decisions get linked to some nefarious goal? The author doesn't even know what it could be, BUT DON'T FORGET! This company tried to patent everything decades ago! Don't forget they're not bringing bash to Windows out of the goodness in their hearts!

ohnomrbill 10y ago
I like your approach sometimes. When dealing with people, I find it best to take positive changes in behavior at face value. I'm sure people could hang their past behavior over their head and treat them as though nothing has changed, but that seems sociopathic. Judging people more harshly based on past behavior is a pretty good way to keep yourself from harm, though. If it weren't unfair to others I would consider doing it. With companies, I have no need to weigh their positive behavior more heavily. No one's feelings are at risk of being hurt; no friendships are on the line. If a company burns me with bad practices, it's safe and prudent to hold their mistakes against them. It should take a very long time for companies to build back goodwill, once lost.
- bryanrasmussen 10y ago
  well the thing is - Microsoft isn't a person, it's a company - as a general rule it is reasonable to assume that companies don't do anything out of the goodness of their hearts, when you also have a good deal of bad behavior in the past ( and 20 years ago can be the recent past for a company) it might make sense to keep an increase sense of skepticism.
  - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
    Twenty years ago isn't "recent history" for anything in the tech industry. People who were at Microsoft back when they were "really evil" in the 90s have since WORKED AT GOOGLE (or any number of other companies you might be a fan of), and even left Google, since then. Very few people who made decisions you may be holding over them today, actually work at Microsoft today. You can legitimately hold a decision against a person for a long time... they're still the same person, more than likely. But a company is an amalgamation of it's employees. And employees come and go.

meapix 10y ago

in other words, just installing cygwin.

ausjke 10y ago

To me Microsoft has been evil long enough, instead of welcoming they "join" open source world, I'm 1000x more concerned they become a tumour and hurt the booming open source at large. Just leave OSS alone Microsoft!

dbgm 10y ago
Why do I keep rolling my eyes everytime I go on hacker news? Microsoft providing more free tools in their suite is nothing but nice. It certainly won't do any harm to OSS.
- badsock 10y ago
  The Greeks providing us with this free giant horse statue is nothing but nice! Microsoft has acted unethically from it's inception until just recently when they've been backed into a corner. For decades they've repeated shown that they're willing to damage the entire industry if it means that they end up with more control over it. Why would you trust that this recent change of heart is permanent given that their hand was forced? When they start acting ethically when they don't have to - that's when I'll reconsider my position.
  - cinquemb 10y ago
    I did some recon at their office in cambridge last night, and it was just too funny to listen to the words out of their evangelists/devs/data scientists mouths, its like they are trying to appeal a caricature of what they think people on the FOS(software/silicon) community want to work on/for lol Sadly they'll attract a lot of desperate college students just chomping at the bit to work for them lol note: (behavior not unique to $msft, same is true of $aapl, $goog, $fb and those who want to emulate such…)
- vblord 10y ago
  I can't believe you don't see the evil. Open your eyes. Just because a company pays 400 million for Xamarin and then open sources the Xamarin SDKs for Android, iOS, and Mac shouldn't fool you. People everywhere... revolt! If you can't tell, I am being sarcastic. I love Microsoft. People just believe what they want to believe. I'm sure they will never change.

ybrah 10y ago

Click bait title and speculation

devereaux 10y ago

Yes, it does. Not so much on servers or desktops, but on phones. The mobile ecosystem is in danger of becoming a iOS/Android duopoly (or already is, depending on which X you want in 9X% to say it is) I love Windows Phones. No so many apps, which is good as I don't have that much time to tweak stuff. Sensitive defaults like a black theme (!!!), a click to enable reading aloud SMS (!!), crazy battery features. They are liquidating the current WP8 line, so it's like $30 if you want to get a Lumia 640 LTE to play with for a weekend (and free unlock code if you want to keep it but don't want AT&T). It's just sad to see something that had so many good things for it go the way of the Dodo.

theboywho 10y ago

GNU is like Leonardo DiCaprio few years ago; never getting the Oscar. Microsoft did not bring Linux to Windows, it brought GNU. Linux is a kernel and there is not even a single bit of it in what microsoft brought to windows. It's technically GNU/Windows.

stormbrew 10y ago
No. Just no. GNU on Windows has existed for a long time in several forms, for one thing. For another, by bringing a compatibility layer for the Linux kernel they have opened the door to much more than just GNU, and it remains incredibly reductivist to claim that that's all the Linux kernel does. You can use the Linux kernel (or this linux-compatible layer) to use a GNU system or a completely non-GNU system if you so choose. What they bring by default as a user-land is Ubuntu, which is actually a complete OS that happens to include both GNU and Linux and many many other things, including essential components that are not part of either project. I say actually a complete OS because, in spite of RMS' protestations to the contrary in the famous "It's GNU/Linux, stupid!" editorial, the GNU system was not "almost finished" when the Linux kernel came along and is still not "almost finished" even today. And the reason it's not almost finished is because the GNU project considers the kernel unimportant, which they prove wrong every year HURD remains a mess that moves forward with the pace of a snail.
- theboywho 10y ago
  You are wrong in so many ways. First of all, you are confusing "Microsoft bringing GNU to Windows" with "this is the first time GNU is brought to Windows." Then you go on to make it seem like if the GNU/Linux debate is just the craziness of some guy called RMS: wrong, many people support this distinction. Then you go off-topic talking about why GNU hurd is a mess. None of this contributes to the key topic here: Microsoft only brought GNU, not Linux and not Ubuntu. A topic where you were wrong again. Please read https://mikegerwitz.com/2016/04/GNU-kWindows https://mikegerwitz.com/2016/04/GNU-kWindows
  - JdeBP 10y ago
    ... as discussed extensively on Hacker News on its own page, including threads such as https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11459025 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11459025 .

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

CyanLite2 10y ago

Ubuntu on Windows does more to destroy OS X. It's about developers choosing Macbooks over Surface Tablets and traditional laptops with a Win10 license. If you're an enterprise running SQL Server now on Windows. You're not going to ditch your cluster to have it re-installed on Linux just to save a couple dollars on an OS license. But if you're a newbie developer fresh out of college and been doing development in a Unix-style environment (because they bought a Macbook instead of a Win8 laptop four years ago), you've probably never been exposed to a Microsoft development environment. These efforts are to capture the next generation of developers who haven't ever touched a Windows desktop and feel comfortable with writing Python on Linux and using MySQL or Oracle. Want proof? Quick, name one unicorn startup who has a Microsoft technology stack. Heck, just name anybody that's using a Microsoft development stack in Silicon Valley... Now those developers can be targeted with .NET, SQL Server, and Ubuntu on Windows. Now instead of buying the same version of that Macbook, those folks can go buy a Surface Tablet clone with the pen and touch screen (and a Windows 10 license!), and still do all of their development on a Unix-style environment. Better yet some will transition to C#, and some will even take advantage of the free-license-for-Oracle-users to switch to SQL Server.