3 ms·
I sort of agree with this. Either Microsoft will purchase Ubuntu outright from Shuttleworth or they will just create Microsoft Linux, in whatever form that is,
by jaboutboul 7y ago
I sort of agree with this. Either Microsoft will purchase Ubuntu outright from Shuttleworth or they will just create Microsoft Linux, in whatever form that is, probably something more container focused than a general purpose OS.
- testvox 7y agohttps://github.com/microsoft/WSL2-Linux-Kernel https://github.com/microsoft/WSL2-Linux-Kernel
- magduf 7y ago>they will just create Microsoft Linux This sounds like something right out of a dystopian nightmare I might have had in the early 2000s.
- ekc 7y agohttp://mslinux.org/ http://mslinux.org/ Quite literally!
- MikusR 7y agoMicrosoft has at least two Linux distributions: Azure Sphere and Azure Cloud Switch. And their own Kernel fork for WSL 2.
- checktheorder 7y agoI've sometimes found myself wondering what kernel is actually running Microsoft's new "Modern OS", and if the userspace has any Ubuntu input.
- muricula 7y agoHello from Redmond. It's all good old NT under the hood. NT is in Azure, XBox, anything which MS builds really. What is interesting is that Windows Subsystem for Linux v2 will actually run a Linux kernel in a VM. I guess implementing a syscall emulation layer for all of Linux was too much, but they still did a very impressive job.
- anticensor 7y agoWSL 1 allows for more security. What they should have done was map WSL users 1:1 to Windows users (Wine users work like that). setuid(), seteuid() and/or capability elevations would raise an UAC prompt as if they were called from Windows.
- muricula 7y agoUAC is not a security boundary, unfortunately :(
- squarefoot 7y ago"Microsoft will purchase Ubuntu outright from Shuttleworth or they will just create Microsoft Linux" I'm pretty sure since like 2 years they're working on at least the second, but the purchase of Ubuntu too doesn't sound that absurd to me. What really concerns me is their power as a big corporation, which could play a role in attracting a growing Linux user base to their distro. This could lead to disasters should Microsoft pollute their OS with proprietary extensions: developers writing software for Linux on a MS branded Linux would create software that "runs better" there or wouldn't run at all on others. No conspiracies here, this happens every day in all offices when printers refuse to work with non same brand ink cartridges; so let's say tomorrow Microsoft ports a significant part of their windowing object model to Linux - to their Linux - as a closed linkable blob, then update their development systems so that one can develop full desktop linux applications with the same graphics interface model of the Windows ones. Technical issues aside, how many developers would resist the temptation? And how many of them would keep dual booting when they could build a career by working exclusively on Microsoft Linux? This is pure speculation of course, but I have this feeling that Microsoft becoming a top Platinum Member of the Linux Foundation was the corporate way of slowly getting to the captains chair.
- tech_tuna 7y agoI predict that Ubuntu, Hashicorp and/or Docker are acquired in the next year. I could see Microsoft acquiring any of them.
- h1d 7y agoLeaving only Debian as an independent popular distro maker sounds bad for the game.