3 ms·
I get what you're saying. I don't like part of the direction Microsoft is taking either. Yet, I don't agree with your perspective. What's happening here is tha
by yunoe 9y ago
I get what you're saying. I don't like part of the direction Microsoft is taking either. Yet, I don't agree with your perspective.
What's happening here is that Microsoft, after a number of years of troubles keeping up, are following the market. WSL is presumably not meant to compete with Linux or FOSS as a desktop OS, but with Mac OS and Linux as developer platforms.
Companies like Google and Apple figured out that if you just give people their pony e.g. base your things on FOSS, they won't notice when you centralize everything, track everyone and generally behave badly. In many ways Microsoft is doing better here. Their projects aim to be cross platform and are being developed together with the community. Instead of usual the code dump and silent mailing list we've become accustomed to from some companies.
Linux have had the chance to do better for awhile now (and in some ways it has). Microsoft have been critized constantly for Windows 8 and now Windows 10. Apple left a huge hole in the "professional" market for years, including after the new Mac Pro and the new MacBook Pro. If some developers move to Windows because of this I think that's fair.
- hardwaresofton 9y ago> What's happening here is that Microsoft, after a number of years of troubles keeping up, are following the market. WSL is presumably not meant to compete with Linux or FOSS as a desktop OS, but with Mac OS and Linux as developer platforms. I understand and agree with that point, I don't believe I remarked on pushing WSL as a Linux or FOSS desktop OS, my point was more that it was way to lure developers to Windows, after Windows has spent time and money making moves that do not benefit developers and hurt competition. Also I already hear the "oh just run it in a VM" argument all the time right now (not saying it has no merit), as reasons for why people don't run linux distributions, and thought this was similar. > Companies like Google and Apple figured out that if you just give people their pony e.g. base your things on FOSS, they won't notice when you centralize everything, track everyone and generally behave badly. In many ways Microsoft is doing better here. Their projects aim to be cross platform and are being developed together with the community. Instead of usual the code dump and silent mailing list we've become accustomed to from some companies. It certainly depends on the product, but "developed together with the community" feels to be to always only be true up to a point (and usually not the point that people end up wanting). Benevolent dictators make sense as the governance model for open source products, but I just don't believe in Microsoft as my benevolent dictator anymore than I would in Google. Also, I'm totally fine with code dump and silent mailing list, it's not the company's job to give you the fruits of their internal labor for free. I don't expect that from any big tech company. I can't see that Microsoft is doing "better", they're just trying to get in the same game that the other companies are already in. Maybe I just haven't interfaced with enough companies running F/OSS projects to know the difference, if it's that stark. > Linux have had the chance to do better for awhile now (and in some ways it has). Microsoft have been critized constantly for Windows 8 and now Windows 10. Apple left a huge hole in the "professional" market for years, including after the new Mac Pro and the new MacBook Pro. If some developers move to Windows because of this I think that's fair. I assume your rationale behind developers moving to Windows being "fair" is that it will encourage competition (and cause the linux community to get off their laurels)? Based on that assumption, while I agree that more competition is good, it's that very competition that microsoft (and most other companies) has seeked to crush at times. The linux community is fundamentally different. Redhat is not (I think) fundamentally different than Microsoft, but the linux community certainly is, because the structure, principles, and philosophy are just not the same. The linux community is not just a competing OS, it's a way of thinking. Shoe-horning a different way of thinking into your own without actually changing your own (and in fact sometimes making philosophical movements in the opposite direction) looks like nothing more than a ploy to entrap people into thinking "microsoft gets me" when they (in my opinion) would be better off committing to an actual group of like-minded people. Also, I'm not 100% sure what exactly you disagreed with in my comment... To sum up: - Microsoft is different partnering closely with the community - Linux needs more competition (?)