17 ms·

Microsoft loves Linux because it makes them money. I'm not sure why anyone would expect differently. They won't release products like Office for Linux (though

Microsoft loves Linux because it makes them money. I'm not sure why anyone would expect differently. They won't release products like Office for Linux (though a web interface is possible), and they won't move away from Windows-only APIs. Neither of those actions would have any tangible benefit for the primary users of those produts (Windows users and Windows developers, respectively). Active Directory is so deeply integrated into the Windows stack that it will never come out. You can authenticate Linux clients against AD, but I doubt they'll be writing a Linux AD server any time soon. I'd imagine most corporate mail servers also support SMTP/IMAP, and Office365 has a web client. As far as ActiveSync goes, that hasn't been a thing since 2007.

conexions 7y ago
A web interface is already a reality.[1] Work great with Chrome or Chromium. Not a full featured office, but in general very nice. [1]https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/office/ndjpnladcallmjemlbaebfadecfhkepb?hl=en https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/office/ndjpnladcal...
- Longhanks 7y ago
  A Chromium-only extension is not a "web interface".
  - derefr 7y ago
    Sure it is, in the sense that it’s very likely not using any Chrome-specific APIs (Chrome right now has the least exposed extension API surface to regular, non-ChromiumOS extensions) but rather at most being equivalent to an Electron app, where some of the HTML and JS lives and runs on the client rather than on a server. But that HTML and JS still is HTML and JS built for a web-rendering-engine to parse and run, so it should be fully possible to turn this extension into a regular web-app with not very much work. Probably any sufficiently-motivated programmer could do it in a couple of hours, throwing the result in an S3 bucket for anyone to access. (Not sure how well it’d run on other browsers, but we still call regular web-apps where the developers happened to only test it in one specific browser “web interfaces.”)
- signal11 7y ago
  It's not just the web versions of Office that work on Linux. On Chromebooks, the Android runtime ensures that the Android MS Office apps run full-screen and take advantage of the large screen and keyboard[1,2]. [1] https://imgur.com/a/rp0VFR4 https://imgur.com/a/rp0VFR4 [2] https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft-android-apps-chromebooks https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft-android-apps-chrome...
mtgx 7y ago
Yes, especially when they can extort patent fees with their patent protection racket from anyone that builds a Linux or Android device. Microsoft continues to make billions of dollars a year in royalties by accusing device makers of patent infringement.
- mastax 7y ago
  https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/microsoft-joins-open-invention-network-to-help-protect-linux-and-open-source/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/microsoft-joins-open-...
wayneftw 7y ago
At one time, Manjaro Linux came with Microsoft Office pre-installed. The apps were built with python jade application kit with embedded webviews that take you to the online version - https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/manjaro-ms-office-online.html https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/manjaro-ms-office-online...
- SirLotsaLocks 7y ago
  That's impressive, has anyone else done something like this?
  - Kwpolska 7y ago
    That's not impressive in any way. They just launch a window with a web view and go to Microsoft’s Office Online. That was already a thing in 2007/2008. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Site-specific_browser https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Site-specific_browser
  - techntoke 7y ago
    Yes, you can now add wrappers with Chrome as well.
hapless 7y ago
You can’t really auth Linux clients against AD, because you will kill the AD servers. AD and ADAM are shockingly low performance compared to Sun/Netscape LDAP. They depend on extensive client side caching to work at all. If you want to tie Unix clients to AD, the first step is to mirror your AD content in a more competent LDAP cluster
- silverfox17 7y ago
  Absolutely not true at all. Various Linux distributions support MSAD integration out of the box.
Spooky23 7y ago
AD will be gone in the 2030 timeframe. Kerberos can’t survive in untrusted networks, and products like Azure AD and Okta are far more profitable, especially since the license that pays for AD (ie windows, even for Linux clients), is required anyway!
- elFarto 7y ago
  > Kerberos can’t survive in untrusted networks... Wasn't Kerberos designed to work in untrusted networks?
  - samlevine 7y ago
    It was, but Active Directory wasn't. If you put your DCs on the Internet you're asking to get hacked.
- samlevine 7y ago
  Another point worth mentioning is that as we move towards zero trust by default, AD getting replaced by Azure AD is a logical step towards that goal.
- silverfox17 7y ago
  Kerberos is designed for untrusted networks.. and Azure AD is just AD hosted somewhere else. Same problems.
  - mynameisvlad 7y ago
    > Azure AD is just AD hosted somewhere else Azure AD DS (https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/active-directory-ds/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/active-directory-...) is a specific offering from Azure which gives you a hosted AD instance, but otherwise AAD is completely different.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
  AD is mostly used internally on corporate networks. Why would untrusted networks be relevant?
morpheuskafka 7y ago
Doesn't Apple Mail still use ActiveSync to connect to Office 365?
baybal2 7y ago
> Microsoft loves Linux because it makes them money. No, no, no. That's not the reason. Have you actually read the article? The reason is that Microsoft is doing a sophisticated stratagem against Linux. It wants to infiltrate the Linux ecosystem, and then when they can keep taps on every piece of essential software, they will pull the plug. The same with patent pledge, they want to bait as much companies to use Linux thinking that Microsoft will not patent troll them, and then they will reveal their true intentions, and sue them all. That trick even got a name now. People in the industry called Microsoft's infiltration strategy "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" Linux crowd will soon realise what trick they are trying to do, and I hope they will do that before it is too late.
gnode 7y ago
I think the only way in which "Microsoft loves Linux" can be scrutinised is: does a successful Linux ecosystem help or harm Microsoft. That it forms part of their business model is not enough, if Microsoft would prefer dominance of its proprietary technologies. Conceivably, the future of Microsoft's business model may be where development and maintenance of Windows / the NT kernel is deemed burdensome and not critical to their business, and Windows becomes a premium Linux distribution with legacy subsystems. Using Linux at work, I'm indirectly a Microsoft customer, using Office 365 and Azure (an expanding portion of their business), yet the investment in Windows desktop is lost on me, and unnecessary to retain my business.
tracker1 7y ago
I wouldn't say they'd never do an Office on Linux... If you look at how they've been leveraging web tech and Electron for VS Code and MS Teams, I'd be very surprised if we didn't see an Electron based version of Office in a couple years. Electron has an amazing cross platform appeal for developers and MS has taken advantage of that. Not to mention managing to write applications under Electron that don't suck (though memory usage is high). And despite high memory usage, Office has never been that nimble in terms of ram use anyway. As for AD, Azure's hosted services for this may well see more inroads into Linux, and I know a LOT of people/companies that would be beyond happy to use MS account management with a cleaner Linux integration. I won't be using these things at home any time soon, but in a corporate space, MS would be a welcome and cost saving change compared to what is out there on Linux currently.
- purple-again 7y ago
  I’m 90% teams doesn’t work on Linux and have been using the web app for a long time now. I sorely miss the slack desktop app and would to be corrected if this is possible now.
  - tracker1 7y ago
    Yeah, teams was pretty badly broken even a few months ago... There's an "unofficial" client in Flathub, that's what I've been using and it mostly works now... the only broken feature I'm aware of that I haven't re-tried is the desktop sharing... but the A/V chat and webcam now work.
  - nocman 7y ago
    Well, if the buzz I've heard recently (and the article below) are correct. A native Linux "Microsoft Teams" client is coming (pretty sure I heard mid-December) https://www.windowscentral.com/its-official-microsoft-teams-coming-linux https://www.windowscentral.com/its-official-microsoft-teams-... EDIT: Yup, the link referenced by the article (https://microsoftteams.uservoice.com/forums/555103-public/suggestions/16911565-linux-client https://microsoftteams.uservoice.com/forums/555103-public/su...) says: "We’re pleased to confirm the Teams client for Linux will be available in preview by the end of this calendar year, enabling people who use Linux client at work or in educational institutions to collaborate with others on Teams. Users will be able to install native Linux packages in .deb and .rpm formats."
pytester 7y ago
>Microsoft loves Linux because it makes them money. I'm not sure why anyone would expect differently. I rather thought the point of the article was that Microsoft didn't actually love linux but pretended that it did to stave off irrelevance in markets where linux is kicking their ass (i.e. server). As he said, if they really loved linux and this isn't just another "embrace, extend, extinguish" ploy sugarcoated in PR niceties they'd be porting office and directx and outlook to linux. Which they're not.
- sverhagen 7y ago
  You're using "love" in different ways. I also love cookies, but I'm not in a committed, lifelong romance with them. (Well, maybe I am. Bad example.)
- ClumsyPilot 7y ago
  None if the examples given are particularly sensible. Turn Word into a webapp? This has been happening for years, but no web editor can offer even 50% of the functionality offered by Word. Office365 is competitive with GSuite. Drop Win32? That's basically asking Microsoft to commit suicide and destroy all companies who rely on windows to run their software. They were trying to get people to move to UWP, and look how hard that has been. Port DirectX? Maybe, don't know. Given that Unity and Unreal both support OpenGL, Metal, Vulkan, and they are available on Windows, would this make any difference?
  - FpUser 7y ago
    DirectX 12 is actually more easy to swallow for the average Joe programmer than Vulcan so maybe it does make sense.
  - pytester 7y ago
    If you define "sensible" as "might impact existing MS monopolies" then no, NONE of it is particularly sensible. Microsoft doesn't love Linux if it interferes with its monopolies. It never did and it never will. That's the whole point. It didn't turn over any new leaf like it claimed. It just adapted its existing strategy as a means to stave off impending irrelevance in the server market. Not turning over a new leaf WAS the "sensible" thing to do.
CharlesColeman 7y ago
> Microsoft loves Linux because it makes them money. I'm not sure why anyone would expect differently. Microsoft has a history that makes skepticism warranted. Look up "Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish" Off the top of my head: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Java_Virtual_Machine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Java_Virtual_Machine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish#Examples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...
- gattilorenz 7y ago
  It's mentioned in the beginning of the article... Plus, I don't see how this contradicts the OP. Maybe EEE was the best way to make money then, but supporting Linux developers is the best way to make money now
petilon 7y ago
> they won't move away from Windows-only APIs Office already runs on MacOS and iOS
- neilobremski 7y ago
  Runs ... but not well. It may be different now but I knew an engineer on the Office for Mac team some years back and it did not sound like a pretty port. I have both a Mac and a Windows machine at work and Excel on the latter is lightning fast compared to the former.
  - sgt 7y ago
    Haven't had issues with Word on the Mac. Seems very fast on my MBP. However I prefer using Pages, Keynote etc. if I can help it. I don't use Numbers, as I usually prefer Google Sheets for that.
stiray 7y ago
I have dumped windows completely after spending some time on windows 8 (fyi: system level developer, but... Well i did my share on aix, hpux, solaris, linux, vms too, but I did love windows... Before the age of manifests, putting com interfaces into kernel32.dll,...) What troubles me THE most on linux is interoperability of applications, there is literally nothing replacing microsoft "office" (not a product Office) stack, it is not a problem for my expertise, but for ordinary John Doe (or lets call him "the manager"), Exchange, Outlook, Sharepoint, Lync (Skype for business) integrated into Office mesh... They have great product. This is the target that linux must pursue. But it is not there. Still struggling to reinvent hot water (systemd, dbus,...), as it is more fun. But not more usable. Anyway, i am satisfied with my shell...
- hamsapelea 7y ago
  Hmm the average joe is already using google drive rather than office et al. Works on linux and mac better than the office stack works on windows.
  - threatofrain 7y ago
    Average student is using Google Docs and Drive but the office workers I hear are driven by corporate culture, and traditional places of work like accounting offices haven’t culturally embraced these kinds of solutions.
    - officeplant 7y ago
      It's not like we are using modern products in most local companies I've worked for in the last decade. Everyone is still on 2008 and older office products. Hell I'm lucky we have AutoCAD LT 2014 at my current job. Its the most up to date piece of software in the whole office other than web browsers.
    - ClumsyPilot 7y ago
      Things is like publisher, illustrator, etc. can replace word. Open office is respectable. But all the google docs champions need to wake up. Google docs is absolutely inferior in its power, formatting options, display performance, ability to write mathematical equations and diagrams directly into the document, etc. Every time I had to produce a non-trivial report in google docs I grind my teeth and end up rendering these things elsewhere and insert them as png. Additionally, google docs gives you no ownership over the software or the files I find it's commercial model unsettling.
streetcat1 7y ago
This is correct. On the client-side, MS is not worried much about Linux desktop and hence will not invest in office for Linux. On the server-side, Linux is a platform of choice for new projects (I would say Kubernetes and containers but those are based on Linux) and hence windows server moved to a more legacy state. In this case, if Microsoft wants to be relevant for future projects, it must embrace Linux. However, since there is no money in Linux as an OS, Microsoft is in the process of becoming a hardware company due to azure. And as such, it would like to commoditize its supplement which is the OS.
k__ 7y ago
Why not? Maybe the OS market was profitable for decades, but isn't anymore? Maybe their goal is to move everything to Linux in the next decade so they don't have to develop their own stuff, getting all that free OSS dev power and can control them by supplying cloud based user-land software, because "Linux never breaks user space"... who knows.
qwerty456127 7y ago
AFAK SAMBA 4 can serve as an AD controller and you probably can run it on Azure. Or even on a Windows server if you want (I used SAMBA client on Windows once).
- throw7 7y ago
  Kind of. A full AD DC isn't supported by redhat (it's disabled) as the MIT kerberos "port" is incomplete and seems dead.
smacktoward 7y ago
> They won't release products like Office for Linux Because the market for desktop Linux applications is too small to be worth considering. The whole reason they "love Linux" now is because Linux on the server gained too much market share for them to realistically oppose. They had to find a way to make money in that market that didn't involve somehow boiling an ocean of Linux machines. So they did. Windows is still overwhelmingly strong in the desktop market, though, so they have no such incentive to accommodate it there. Nobody retreats from a battlefield they've already won.
- at-fates-hands 7y ago
  > Because the market for desktop Linux applications is too small to be worth considering. I would also add in there are other open source options that are compatible and work well with MS Office now. Libre Office and Open Office are two such examples. I can now write my resume in either or and save it in a docx format, send it to a recruiter and then they can open it with MS Word without any issues.
  - jay_kyburz 7y ago
    errr... I would still export it as PDF first. I wouldn't trust something as important as a job application to work perfectly. (I'm a Libre Office user on Windows. )
  - jacquesm 7y ago
    The bigger competitor for Word and the rest of the office suite is not Libre or Open Office but Google Docs. It's cross platform and does away with local file storage, which is a security risk and a data loss risk.
    - at-fates-hands 7y ago
      Good call. I haven't used Google Docs in a long time and had forgotten about them.
    - bakuninsbart 7y ago
shotashotshota 7y ago
>Microsoft loves Linux because it makes them money. I'm not sure why anyone would expect differently. It should really be "<X corporation> loves <Y> because it makes them money" because let's be honest, the only reason these companies make any decisions, moral or not, is to make money They supported <any movement> and showcased these supports with events, banners, and advertisement only because that's what they _need_ to do to make _profit_. They could easily discard all of these values the moment a government or a market said they can't do it. Just look at all the companies bowing down to China.
lima 7y ago
> You can authenticate Linux clients against AD, but I doubt they'll be writing a Linux AD server any time soon. They did it for SQL Server, and they built a full API compatibility shim to do it: https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/17/how-microsoft-brought-sql-server-to-linux/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/17/how-microsoft-brought-sql-...
fortran77 7y ago
The online Office 365 works great on Linux in the browser. And they're bringing their Chromium-based Edge to Linux to make sure users have a perfect experience.
qwerty456127 7y ago
I once tried running MS Office 2007 on Linux with Wine and it worked great, no quirks I could notice. That happened during the days when Office 2010 was new and mos of the people still were using 2007. Some time later I've read 2010 already works fine, tried it and it did. Newer versions probably work ok too as for today. You can use MS Office on Linux and it's hardly a problem (hint: the real problem is Adobe). Why? Because Linux is more safe (that's why I migrated people who use MS Office to it), faster, more cool/convenient/customizable (e.g. I feel like the latest KDE provides "like Mac but even better" experience), more reliable (updates are frequent and never ruin your system) and free (which is a thing in countries with less developed economies).
asveikau 7y ago
> They won't release products like Office for Linux This one I don't really understand why not. Presumably Office for Linux would still bring in revenue. Just not the additional indirect revenue of a Windows license. > (though a web interface is possible), I am not totally familiar with the "Office365" brand and what it includes, but I get the impression some browser based stuff already works on Linux. In work accounts at former employers I have used a web-based Outlook on Linux and FreeBSD that had some "Office365" branding. > and they won't move away from Windows-only APIs This one I don't know why they would ever do. Win32 apps are still driving revenue and customer satisfaction for them. More, I think, than they admit to themselves. Witness they tried to kill Win32 apps in the Windows 8 cycle, and failed. Then kept trying to resurrect the idea of killing Win32, and had to walk it back every time. Surface RT wouldn't do third party Win32 apps. Neither would Windows Store initially. Then they floated a Windows 10 amd64 SKU that couldn't run third party Win32 apps. Nobody wanted this stuff. That legacy is pretty much the only thing that keeps people on Windows.
- int_19h 7y ago
  Don't forget the expense of porting it in the first place, and then maintaining it after.
  - dcolkitt 7y ago
    > maintaining it after This is the real elephant in the room. Despite all their other flaws Microsoft has an excellent record of maintaining their software well after release. Particularly when it comes to their core products like Office or Windows. WIN32 programs or XLS files from 30 years ago still work on the latest versions. If Microsoft didn't have this commitment, then porting Office to Linux as an experiment might be worth it. Even if there's a 10% chance it takes root, that's good revenue. But even if only a small base of users bought Office Linux it, Microsoft's reputation would require them keep maintaining it for decades.
    - asveikau 7y ago
      To echo what you were saying, binary distribution on Linux is indeed tough. A while ago I needed to experiment with an old file format, and I found a Linux binary of a proprietary tool from the 90s. It linked to libc version 5 (from before the Linux world adopted glibc). It would have been complicated to get it running. I found a Windows binary of the same tool. Put it on a Win10 VM I had for other purposes. No issues. Stable binary ABI of userland is something the Linux world doesn't do well. Win32 and COM are really good at this.
jra_samba 7y ago
FYI, Samba version 4+ is an Active Directory Domain Controller that runs on Linux. Samba 4.11 is scalable to 100,000+ users. In case you want to give us a try :-).
- sudosteph 7y ago
  I have fond memories of running Samba on CentOS at my first tech job at a university. We only had to support enough infrastructure for a couple hundred people in our department, but we wanted to do it with entirely open-source software. There's no way we could have done that if not for Samba. So thank you for working so hard to make that possible!
judge2020 7y ago
Office online is already a thing and available for free https://products.office.com/en-us/free-office-online-for-the-web https://products.office.com/en-us/free-office-online-for-the...
yellowapple 7y ago
> I doubt they'll be writing a Linux AD server any time soon They don't need to. Samba exists; nothing stopping Microsoft from sending in patches.
koffiezet 7y ago
Well, 2 things: * There are, right now, online browser-based versions of most of their office applications available, which work fine on Linux. * if [1] is anything to go by, we might see client-side Javascript/Electron based clients, which would make the porting to other platforms a lot cheaper/easier to maintain. Even if a "native" (read: electron-wrapped) Linux client wouldn't be in the works, the browser-based versions will probably be just the exact same version. [1] https://twitter.com/TheLarkInn/status/1006746626617008128 https://twitter.com/TheLarkInn/status/1006746626617008128

conexions 7y ago

A web interface is already a reality.[1] Work great with Chrome or Chromium. Not a full featured office, but in general very nice. [1]https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/office/ndjpnladcallmjemlbaebfadecfhkepb?hl=en https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/office/ndjpnladcal...

Longhanks 7y ago
A Chromium-only extension is not a "web interface".
- derefr 7y ago
  Sure it is, in the sense that it’s very likely not using any Chrome-specific APIs (Chrome right now has the least exposed extension API surface to regular, non-ChromiumOS extensions) but rather at most being equivalent to an Electron app, where some of the HTML and JS lives and runs on the client rather than on a server. But that HTML and JS still is HTML and JS built for a web-rendering-engine to parse and run, so it should be fully possible to turn this extension into a regular web-app with not very much work. Probably any sufficiently-motivated programmer could do it in a couple of hours, throwing the result in an S3 bucket for anyone to access. (Not sure how well it’d run on other browsers, but we still call regular web-apps where the developers happened to only test it in one specific browser “web interfaces.”)
signal11 7y ago
It's not just the web versions of Office that work on Linux. On Chromebooks, the Android runtime ensures that the Android MS Office apps run full-screen and take advantage of the large screen and keyboard[1,2]. [1] https://imgur.com/a/rp0VFR4 https://imgur.com/a/rp0VFR4 [2] https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft-android-apps-chromebooks https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft-android-apps-chrome...

mtgx 7y ago

Yes, especially when they can extort patent fees with their patent protection racket from anyone that builds a Linux or Android device. Microsoft continues to make billions of dollars a year in royalties by accusing device makers of patent infringement.

mastax 7y ago
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/microsoft-joins-open-invention-network-to-help-protect-linux-and-open-source/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/microsoft-joins-open-...

wayneftw 7y ago

At one time, Manjaro Linux came with Microsoft Office pre-installed. The apps were built with python jade application kit with embedded webviews that take you to the online version - https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/manjaro-ms-office-online.html https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/manjaro-ms-office-online...

SirLotsaLocks 7y ago
That's impressive, has anyone else done something like this?
- Kwpolska 7y ago
  That's not impressive in any way. They just launch a window with a web view and go to Microsoft’s Office Online. That was already a thing in 2007/2008. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Site-specific_browser https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Site-specific_browser
- techntoke 7y ago
  Yes, you can now add wrappers with Chrome as well.

hapless 7y ago

You can’t really auth Linux clients against AD, because you will kill the AD servers. AD and ADAM are shockingly low performance compared to Sun/Netscape LDAP. They depend on extensive client side caching to work at all. If you want to tie Unix clients to AD, the first step is to mirror your AD content in a more competent LDAP cluster

silverfox17 7y ago
Absolutely not true at all. Various Linux distributions support MSAD integration out of the box.

Spooky23 7y ago

AD will be gone in the 2030 timeframe. Kerberos can’t survive in untrusted networks, and products like Azure AD and Okta are far more profitable, especially since the license that pays for AD (ie windows, even for Linux clients), is required anyway!

elFarto 7y ago
> Kerberos can’t survive in untrusted networks... Wasn't Kerberos designed to work in untrusted networks?
- samlevine 7y ago
  It was, but Active Directory wasn't. If you put your DCs on the Internet you're asking to get hacked.
samlevine 7y ago
Another point worth mentioning is that as we move towards zero trust by default, AD getting replaced by Azure AD is a logical step towards that goal.
silverfox17 7y ago
Kerberos is designed for untrusted networks.. and Azure AD is just AD hosted somewhere else. Same problems.
- mynameisvlad 7y ago
  > Azure AD is just AD hosted somewhere else Azure AD DS (https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/active-directory-ds/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/active-directory-...) is a specific offering from Azure which gives you a hosted AD instance, but otherwise AAD is completely different.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
AD is mostly used internally on corporate networks. Why would untrusted networks be relevant?

morpheuskafka 7y ago

Doesn't Apple Mail still use ActiveSync to connect to Office 365?

baybal2 7y ago

> Microsoft loves Linux because it makes them money. No, no, no. That's not the reason. Have you actually read the article? The reason is that Microsoft is doing a sophisticated stratagem against Linux. It wants to infiltrate the Linux ecosystem, and then when they can keep taps on every piece of essential software, they will pull the plug. The same with patent pledge, they want to bait as much companies to use Linux thinking that Microsoft will not patent troll them, and then they will reveal their true intentions, and sue them all. That trick even got a name now. People in the industry called Microsoft's infiltration strategy "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" Linux crowd will soon realise what trick they are trying to do, and I hope they will do that before it is too late.

gnode 7y ago

I think the only way in which "Microsoft loves Linux" can be scrutinised is: does a successful Linux ecosystem help or harm Microsoft. That it forms part of their business model is not enough, if Microsoft would prefer dominance of its proprietary technologies. Conceivably, the future of Microsoft's business model may be where development and maintenance of Windows / the NT kernel is deemed burdensome and not critical to their business, and Windows becomes a premium Linux distribution with legacy subsystems. Using Linux at work, I'm indirectly a Microsoft customer, using Office 365 and Azure (an expanding portion of their business), yet the investment in Windows desktop is lost on me, and unnecessary to retain my business.

tracker1 7y ago

I wouldn't say they'd never do an Office on Linux... If you look at how they've been leveraging web tech and Electron for VS Code and MS Teams, I'd be very surprised if we didn't see an Electron based version of Office in a couple years. Electron has an amazing cross platform appeal for developers and MS has taken advantage of that. Not to mention managing to write applications under Electron that don't suck (though memory usage is high). And despite high memory usage, Office has never been that nimble in terms of ram use anyway. As for AD, Azure's hosted services for this may well see more inroads into Linux, and I know a LOT of people/companies that would be beyond happy to use MS account management with a cleaner Linux integration. I won't be using these things at home any time soon, but in a corporate space, MS would be a welcome and cost saving change compared to what is out there on Linux currently.

purple-again 7y ago
I’m 90% teams doesn’t work on Linux and have been using the web app for a long time now. I sorely miss the slack desktop app and would to be corrected if this is possible now.
- tracker1 7y ago
  Yeah, teams was pretty badly broken even a few months ago... There's an "unofficial" client in Flathub, that's what I've been using and it mostly works now... the only broken feature I'm aware of that I haven't re-tried is the desktop sharing... but the A/V chat and webcam now work.
- nocman 7y ago
  Well, if the buzz I've heard recently (and the article below) are correct. A native Linux "Microsoft Teams" client is coming (pretty sure I heard mid-December) https://www.windowscentral.com/its-official-microsoft-teams-coming-linux https://www.windowscentral.com/its-official-microsoft-teams-... EDIT: Yup, the link referenced by the article (https://microsoftteams.uservoice.com/forums/555103-public/suggestions/16911565-linux-client https://microsoftteams.uservoice.com/forums/555103-public/su...) says: "We’re pleased to confirm the Teams client for Linux will be available in preview by the end of this calendar year, enabling people who use Linux client at work or in educational institutions to collaborate with others on Teams. Users will be able to install native Linux packages in .deb and .rpm formats."

pytester 7y ago

>Microsoft loves Linux because it makes them money. I'm not sure why anyone would expect differently. I rather thought the point of the article was that Microsoft didn't actually love linux but pretended that it did to stave off irrelevance in markets where linux is kicking their ass (i.e. server). As he said, if they really loved linux and this isn't just another "embrace, extend, extinguish" ploy sugarcoated in PR niceties they'd be porting office and directx and outlook to linux. Which they're not.

sverhagen 7y ago
You're using "love" in different ways. I also love cookies, but I'm not in a committed, lifelong romance with them. (Well, maybe I am. Bad example.)
ClumsyPilot 7y ago
None if the examples given are particularly sensible. Turn Word into a webapp? This has been happening for years, but no web editor can offer even 50% of the functionality offered by Word. Office365 is competitive with GSuite. Drop Win32? That's basically asking Microsoft to commit suicide and destroy all companies who rely on windows to run their software. They were trying to get people to move to UWP, and look how hard that has been. Port DirectX? Maybe, don't know. Given that Unity and Unreal both support OpenGL, Metal, Vulkan, and they are available on Windows, would this make any difference?
- FpUser 7y ago
  DirectX 12 is actually more easy to swallow for the average Joe programmer than Vulcan so maybe it does make sense.
- pytester 7y ago
  If you define "sensible" as "might impact existing MS monopolies" then no, NONE of it is particularly sensible. Microsoft doesn't love Linux if it interferes with its monopolies. It never did and it never will. That's the whole point. It didn't turn over any new leaf like it claimed. It just adapted its existing strategy as a means to stave off impending irrelevance in the server market. Not turning over a new leaf WAS the "sensible" thing to do.

CharlesColeman 7y ago

> Microsoft loves Linux because it makes them money. I'm not sure why anyone would expect differently. Microsoft has a history that makes skepticism warranted. Look up "Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish" Off the top of my head: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Java_Virtual_Machine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Java_Virtual_Machine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish#Examples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...

gattilorenz 7y ago
It's mentioned in the beginning of the article... Plus, I don't see how this contradicts the OP. Maybe EEE was the best way to make money then, but supporting Linux developers is the best way to make money now

petilon 7y ago

> they won't move away from Windows-only APIs Office already runs on MacOS and iOS

neilobremski 7y ago
Runs ... but not well. It may be different now but I knew an engineer on the Office for Mac team some years back and it did not sound like a pretty port. I have both a Mac and a Windows machine at work and Excel on the latter is lightning fast compared to the former.
- sgt 7y ago
  Haven't had issues with Word on the Mac. Seems very fast on my MBP. However I prefer using Pages, Keynote etc. if I can help it. I don't use Numbers, as I usually prefer Google Sheets for that.

stiray 7y ago

I have dumped windows completely after spending some time on windows 8 (fyi: system level developer, but... Well i did my share on aix, hpux, solaris, linux, vms too, but I did love windows... Before the age of manifests, putting com interfaces into kernel32.dll,...) What troubles me THE most on linux is interoperability of applications, there is literally nothing replacing microsoft "office" (not a product Office) stack, it is not a problem for my expertise, but for ordinary John Doe (or lets call him "the manager"), Exchange, Outlook, Sharepoint, Lync (Skype for business) integrated into Office mesh... They have great product. This is the target that linux must pursue. But it is not there. Still struggling to reinvent hot water (systemd, dbus,...), as it is more fun. But not more usable. Anyway, i am satisfied with my shell...

hamsapelea 7y ago
Hmm the average joe is already using google drive rather than office et al. Works on linux and mac better than the office stack works on windows.
- threatofrain 7y ago
  Average student is using Google Docs and Drive but the office workers I hear are driven by corporate culture, and traditional places of work like accounting offices haven’t culturally embraced these kinds of solutions.
  - officeplant 7y ago
    It's not like we are using modern products in most local companies I've worked for in the last decade. Everyone is still on 2008 and older office products. Hell I'm lucky we have AutoCAD LT 2014 at my current job. Its the most up to date piece of software in the whole office other than web browsers.
  - ClumsyPilot 7y ago
    Things is like publisher, illustrator, etc. can replace word. Open office is respectable. But all the google docs champions need to wake up. Google docs is absolutely inferior in its power, formatting options, display performance, ability to write mathematical equations and diagrams directly into the document, etc. Every time I had to produce a non-trivial report in google docs I grind my teeth and end up rendering these things elsewhere and insert them as png. Additionally, google docs gives you no ownership over the software or the files I find it's commercial model unsettling.

streetcat1 7y ago

This is correct. On the client-side, MS is not worried much about Linux desktop and hence will not invest in office for Linux. On the server-side, Linux is a platform of choice for new projects (I would say Kubernetes and containers but those are based on Linux) and hence windows server moved to a more legacy state. In this case, if Microsoft wants to be relevant for future projects, it must embrace Linux. However, since there is no money in Linux as an OS, Microsoft is in the process of becoming a hardware company due to azure. And as such, it would like to commoditize its supplement which is the OS.

k__ 7y ago

Why not? Maybe the OS market was profitable for decades, but isn't anymore? Maybe their goal is to move everything to Linux in the next decade so they don't have to develop their own stuff, getting all that free OSS dev power and can control them by supplying cloud based user-land software, because "Linux never breaks user space"... who knows.

qwerty456127 7y ago

AFAK SAMBA 4 can serve as an AD controller and you probably can run it on Azure. Or even on a Windows server if you want (I used SAMBA client on Windows once).

throw7 7y ago
Kind of. A full AD DC isn't supported by redhat (it's disabled) as the MIT kerberos "port" is incomplete and seems dead.

smacktoward 7y ago

> They won't release products like Office for Linux Because the market for desktop Linux applications is too small to be worth considering. The whole reason they "love Linux" now is because Linux on the server gained too much market share for them to realistically oppose. They had to find a way to make money in that market that didn't involve somehow boiling an ocean of Linux machines. So they did. Windows is still overwhelmingly strong in the desktop market, though, so they have no such incentive to accommodate it there. Nobody retreats from a battlefield they've already won.

at-fates-hands 7y ago
> Because the market for desktop Linux applications is too small to be worth considering. I would also add in there are other open source options that are compatible and work well with MS Office now. Libre Office and Open Office are two such examples. I can now write my resume in either or and save it in a docx format, send it to a recruiter and then they can open it with MS Word without any issues.
- jay_kyburz 7y ago
  errr... I would still export it as PDF first. I wouldn't trust something as important as a job application to work perfectly. (I'm a Libre Office user on Windows. )
- jacquesm 7y ago
  The bigger competitor for Word and the rest of the office suite is not Libre or Open Office but Google Docs. It's cross platform and does away with local file storage, which is a security risk and a data loss risk.
  - at-fates-hands 7y ago
    Good call. I haven't used Google Docs in a long time and had forgotten about them.
  - bakuninsbart 7y ago

shotashotshota 7y ago

>Microsoft loves Linux because it makes them money. I'm not sure why anyone would expect differently. It should really be "<X corporation> loves <Y> because it makes them money" because let's be honest, the only reason these companies make any decisions, moral or not, is to make money They supported <any movement> and showcased these supports with events, banners, and advertisement only because that's what they _need_ to do to make _profit_. They could easily discard all of these values the moment a government or a market said they can't do it. Just look at all the companies bowing down to China.

lima 7y ago

> You can authenticate Linux clients against AD, but I doubt they'll be writing a Linux AD server any time soon. They did it for SQL Server, and they built a full API compatibility shim to do it: https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/17/how-microsoft-brought-sql-server-to-linux/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/17/how-microsoft-brought-sql-...

fortran77 7y ago

The online Office 365 works great on Linux in the browser. And they're bringing their Chromium-based Edge to Linux to make sure users have a perfect experience.

qwerty456127 7y ago

I once tried running MS Office 2007 on Linux with Wine and it worked great, no quirks I could notice. That happened during the days when Office 2010 was new and mos of the people still were using 2007. Some time later I've read 2010 already works fine, tried it and it did. Newer versions probably work ok too as for today. You can use MS Office on Linux and it's hardly a problem (hint: the real problem is Adobe). Why? Because Linux is more safe (that's why I migrated people who use MS Office to it), faster, more cool/convenient/customizable (e.g. I feel like the latest KDE provides "like Mac but even better" experience), more reliable (updates are frequent and never ruin your system) and free (which is a thing in countries with less developed economies).

asveikau 7y ago

> They won't release products like Office for Linux This one I don't really understand why not. Presumably Office for Linux would still bring in revenue. Just not the additional indirect revenue of a Windows license. > (though a web interface is possible), I am not totally familiar with the "Office365" brand and what it includes, but I get the impression some browser based stuff already works on Linux. In work accounts at former employers I have used a web-based Outlook on Linux and FreeBSD that had some "Office365" branding. > and they won't move away from Windows-only APIs This one I don't know why they would ever do. Win32 apps are still driving revenue and customer satisfaction for them. More, I think, than they admit to themselves. Witness they tried to kill Win32 apps in the Windows 8 cycle, and failed. Then kept trying to resurrect the idea of killing Win32, and had to walk it back every time. Surface RT wouldn't do third party Win32 apps. Neither would Windows Store initially. Then they floated a Windows 10 amd64 SKU that couldn't run third party Win32 apps. Nobody wanted this stuff. That legacy is pretty much the only thing that keeps people on Windows.

int_19h 7y ago
Don't forget the expense of porting it in the first place, and then maintaining it after.
- dcolkitt 7y ago
  > maintaining it after This is the real elephant in the room. Despite all their other flaws Microsoft has an excellent record of maintaining their software well after release. Particularly when it comes to their core products like Office or Windows. WIN32 programs or XLS files from 30 years ago still work on the latest versions. If Microsoft didn't have this commitment, then porting Office to Linux as an experiment might be worth it. Even if there's a 10% chance it takes root, that's good revenue. But even if only a small base of users bought Office Linux it, Microsoft's reputation would require them keep maintaining it for decades.
  - asveikau 7y ago
    To echo what you were saying, binary distribution on Linux is indeed tough. A while ago I needed to experiment with an old file format, and I found a Linux binary of a proprietary tool from the 90s. It linked to libc version 5 (from before the Linux world adopted glibc). It would have been complicated to get it running. I found a Windows binary of the same tool. Put it on a Win10 VM I had for other purposes. No issues. Stable binary ABI of userland is something the Linux world doesn't do well. Win32 and COM are really good at this.

jra_samba 7y ago

FYI, Samba version 4+ is an Active Directory Domain Controller that runs on Linux. Samba 4.11 is scalable to 100,000+ users. In case you want to give us a try :-).

sudosteph 7y ago
I have fond memories of running Samba on CentOS at my first tech job at a university. We only had to support enough infrastructure for a couple hundred people in our department, but we wanted to do it with entirely open-source software. There's no way we could have done that if not for Samba. So thank you for working so hard to make that possible!

judge2020 7y ago

Office online is already a thing and available for free https://products.office.com/en-us/free-office-online-for-the-web https://products.office.com/en-us/free-office-online-for-the...

yellowapple 7y ago

> I doubt they'll be writing a Linux AD server any time soon They don't need to. Samba exists; nothing stopping Microsoft from sending in patches.

koffiezet 7y ago

Well, 2 things: * There are, right now, online browser-based versions of most of their office applications available, which work fine on Linux. * if [1] is anything to go by, we might see client-side Javascript/Electron based clients, which would make the porting to other platforms a lot cheaper/easier to maintain. Even if a "native" (read: electron-wrapped) Linux client wouldn't be in the works, the browser-based versions will probably be just the exact same version. [1] https://twitter.com/TheLarkInn/status/1006746626617008128 https://twitter.com/TheLarkInn/status/1006746626617008128