5 ms·

I predict that MS will be the ones to finally bring about a Linux desktop with mass market adoption. They'll do it by making it look like Windows, act like Wind

I predict that MS will be the ones to finally bring about a Linux desktop with mass market adoption. They'll do it by making it look like Windows, act like Windows, work with Windows files, and run Windows apps through emulation or virtualization. It's pretty brilliant, really, because it solves both problems: the user doesn't have to change anything and the IT department gets the open source foundation they want.

kumarvvr 7y ago
As of now, Microsoft is only including Linux to get developers to start using windows for development of cloud apps and services. So Linux in windows, presently, is just the kernel and other essentials, that enable developers to develop and test command line applications. P.S : By windows, I mean the Microsoft cloud ecosystem, not windows OS per se.
- indigodaddy 7y ago
  Agree with this sentiment.
ripdog 7y ago
Yep, absolutely. It may not happen next year, but it will happen. The point at which this move became obvious is when they gave up on EdgeHTML and switched to Blink. Just like web engines, operating systems are hard. They require a lot of experienced, highly paid engineers to keep working at the leading edge of tech. When you have a free, open source, collaboratively developed competitor at a similar or better level of tech as your product, why bother spending all that money on making your own? Just use Linux! Basing Windows on Linux means MS gets the benefit of thousands of contributors from other companies and individual users. Their users don't care because Word and Photoshop still run fine on a light virtualization layer, and for less involved apps a MS-supported Wine will run them with 0 performance loss. Hardware vendors will initially be unhappy, as they may have to rewrite their drivers for Linux, but in the longer term it is a great advantage to them - a single driver could power their hardware in literally every computer on earth except macs. That's an unparalled level of compatibility we've never seen before. Windows would also run 100% flawlessly on other CPU archs. It would be trivial to port Windows to ARM and take advantage of the laptop-class ARM chips coming out recently. Old x86 programs run happily in the virtualized environment, and everything else is probably open source. (Admittedly a lot of companies will still ship closed source apps for Windows, so they will have to port in-house). I think UWP apps are already arch-independant and run on NET, which is already open source and I think runs on ARM. I think the business case for WindowsLinux over plain Linux would still come from the NT kernel and userland, though. The VM delivered to every WindowsLinux user would still be a big blob of proprietary code, running on an OSS VM. Microsoft would be charging enterprise for a guaranteed-flawless and seamless way of running their legacy and big commercial apps on WindowsLinux. No need for a 'virtual desktop', all apps will run with no window decorations on the native desktop and be decorated natively. The VM would be entirely invisible. Perhaps even the GUI could be drawn outside the VM, with drawing/GPU commands going to virtual components inside the VM which redirect them outside.
- contextfree 7y ago
  "I think UWP apps are already arch-independant and run on NET, which is already open source and I think runs on ARM." This isn't true, though it's a common misconception. UWP isn't tied to .NET or any VM. UWP apps can use a VM or use native code, and if they're native they're just as arch-dependent as any native app. The "universal" part comes from them only depending on a subset of Windows APIs which are present on all Windows editions. The desktop edition of Windows already runs on ARM, regardless.
- icebraining 7y ago
  Regarding the "other CPU archs" point, Windows already runs on ARM: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/arm/ https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/arm/
schuke 7y ago
That would be basically how The Mareix ended: Neo becoming one with agent Smith thus killing him.
newnewpdro 7y ago
Shipping a Linux compatibility layer in the form of an integrated Linux virtual machine does not in any way equate bringing about a Linux desktop to the masses. It's shipping a Windows desktop that has a convenient way to do *NIX-style things, largely for developers who are leaving MS for Apple. It also takes away from the Linux community and future support for desktop hardware on Linux. This is hurting Linux, not helping.
- mimixco 7y ago
  It's the first step. No one has successfully deployed a Linux desktop to the mass market and I've outlined how MS could. And I think they will. It's actually a Very Good Thing for Linux because it cements its position as the underlying operating system -- something which is now required by enterprise IT. As I said, this will result in more desktops running Linux, not fewer. I've never been a big MS fan but I have to say this is quite smart and will very likely be hugely successful.
  - newnewpdro 7y ago
    This is going to kill Linux's long-term ability to run directly on consumer hardware if it becomes the primary way people access a Linux userspace. Without users running Linux on current consumer hardware, its support to do so will atrophy. What MS is doing is the inverse of what's best for the users. We should be running the Libre kernel+drivers directly on the metal, if you need Windows run that in a VM.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - copperx 7y ago
    > I've outlined how MS could. And I think they will. This is completely insane and not Microsofty at all, Satya or not.
    - mimixco 7y ago
tracker1 7y ago
I don't know that the NT kernel is going away ANY time soon... But, I am glad to see a working linux subsystem with support for SystemD (good or bad there) and Docker in the box. If volume/drive shares/mounts works well, I'll be very happy. Git bash's windows-isms mostly suck, and Docker's lack of real volume mounts is painful for anything i/o heavy. It isn't the IT side, either... it lets developers WRITE, RUN and TEST Linux software, at least making it an option instead of more Windows-only.
quantummkv 7y ago
It's like saying Ford will bring an electric truck to the mass market by making it sound like an ICE, act like an ICE, work with Diesel and run a 6-litre V12 to charge the batteries with a dynamo. A complete and utter waste that does nothing more than destroy the environment it claims to benefit.
- mimixco 7y ago
  If you're a company like Ford with 30,000 Windows desktops, you might look at it differently.

kumarvvr 7y ago

As of now, Microsoft is only including Linux to get developers to start using windows for development of cloud apps and services. So Linux in windows, presently, is just the kernel and other essentials, that enable developers to develop and test command line applications. P.S : By windows, I mean the Microsoft cloud ecosystem, not windows OS per se.

indigodaddy 7y ago
Agree with this sentiment.

ripdog 7y ago

Yep, absolutely. It may not happen next year, but it will happen. The point at which this move became obvious is when they gave up on EdgeHTML and switched to Blink. Just like web engines, operating systems are hard. They require a lot of experienced, highly paid engineers to keep working at the leading edge of tech. When you have a free, open source, collaboratively developed competitor at a similar or better level of tech as your product, why bother spending all that money on making your own? Just use Linux! Basing Windows on Linux means MS gets the benefit of thousands of contributors from other companies and individual users. Their users don't care because Word and Photoshop still run fine on a light virtualization layer, and for less involved apps a MS-supported Wine will run them with 0 performance loss. Hardware vendors will initially be unhappy, as they may have to rewrite their drivers for Linux, but in the longer term it is a great advantage to them - a single driver could power their hardware in literally every computer on earth except macs. That's an unparalled level of compatibility we've never seen before. Windows would also run 100% flawlessly on other CPU archs. It would be trivial to port Windows to ARM and take advantage of the laptop-class ARM chips coming out recently. Old x86 programs run happily in the virtualized environment, and everything else is probably open source. (Admittedly a lot of companies will still ship closed source apps for Windows, so they will have to port in-house). I think UWP apps are already arch-independant and run on NET, which is already open source and I think runs on ARM. I think the business case for WindowsLinux over plain Linux would still come from the NT kernel and userland, though. The VM delivered to every WindowsLinux user would still be a big blob of proprietary code, running on an OSS VM. Microsoft would be charging enterprise for a guaranteed-flawless and seamless way of running their legacy and big commercial apps on WindowsLinux. No need for a 'virtual desktop', all apps will run with no window decorations on the native desktop and be decorated natively. The VM would be entirely invisible. Perhaps even the GUI could be drawn outside the VM, with drawing/GPU commands going to virtual components inside the VM which redirect them outside.

contextfree 7y ago
"I think UWP apps are already arch-independant and run on NET, which is already open source and I think runs on ARM." This isn't true, though it's a common misconception. UWP isn't tied to .NET or any VM. UWP apps can use a VM or use native code, and if they're native they're just as arch-dependent as any native app. The "universal" part comes from them only depending on a subset of Windows APIs which are present on all Windows editions. The desktop edition of Windows already runs on ARM, regardless.
icebraining 7y ago
Regarding the "other CPU archs" point, Windows already runs on ARM: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/arm/ https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/arm/

schuke 7y ago

That would be basically how The Mareix ended: Neo becoming one with agent Smith thus killing him.

newnewpdro 7y ago

Shipping a Linux compatibility layer in the form of an integrated Linux virtual machine does not in any way equate bringing about a Linux desktop to the masses. It's shipping a Windows desktop that has a convenient way to do *NIX-style things, largely for developers who are leaving MS for Apple. It also takes away from the Linux community and future support for desktop hardware on Linux. This is hurting Linux, not helping.

mimixco 7y ago
It's the first step. No one has successfully deployed a Linux desktop to the mass market and I've outlined how MS could. And I think they will. It's actually a Very Good Thing for Linux because it cements its position as the underlying operating system -- something which is now required by enterprise IT. As I said, this will result in more desktops running Linux, not fewer. I've never been a big MS fan but I have to say this is quite smart and will very likely be hugely successful.
- newnewpdro 7y ago
  This is going to kill Linux's long-term ability to run directly on consumer hardware if it becomes the primary way people access a Linux userspace. Without users running Linux on current consumer hardware, its support to do so will atrophy. What MS is doing is the inverse of what's best for the users. We should be running the Libre kernel+drivers directly on the metal, if you need Windows run that in a VM.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- copperx 7y ago
  > I've outlined how MS could. And I think they will. This is completely insane and not Microsofty at all, Satya or not.
  - mimixco 7y ago

tracker1 7y ago

I don't know that the NT kernel is going away ANY time soon... But, I am glad to see a working linux subsystem with support for SystemD (good or bad there) and Docker in the box. If volume/drive shares/mounts works well, I'll be very happy. Git bash's windows-isms mostly suck, and Docker's lack of real volume mounts is painful for anything i/o heavy. It isn't the IT side, either... it lets developers WRITE, RUN and TEST Linux software, at least making it an option instead of more Windows-only.

quantummkv 7y ago

It's like saying Ford will bring an electric truck to the mass market by making it sound like an ICE, act like an ICE, work with Diesel and run a 6-litre V12 to charge the batteries with a dynamo. A complete and utter waste that does nothing more than destroy the environment it claims to benefit.

mimixco 7y ago
If you're a company like Ford with 30,000 Windows desktops, you might look at it differently.