2 ms·

"But I'm not sure what this will do to Open Source in the long run." I don't know about Open Source as a concept/movement, however it will destroy Linux as we

"But I'm not sure what this will do to Open Source in the long run." I don't know about Open Source as a concept/movement, however it will destroy Linux as we know it. More and more developers are already flocking to it (and VSC) for writing Linux software. All it needs is a killer library (Windows GUI bindings?) and/or extensions that could push developers into writing software that expects to be run under WSL instead of the real thing. It may seem stretched, but WSL is to Linux what WINE is to Windows; so how many of us could run Windows software under WINE without any Windows installed? WINE didn't damage Windows because there are simply too many native Windows installs compared to Linux users with WINE, but what about the other way around? Linux wouldn't stand a chance. Microsoft is slowly gaining full control of Linux, one developer at a time, and nobody seems to care.

godzillabrennus 7y ago
Linux runs on more servers than desktops. Can’t imagine the licensing for server editions of Windows will take off when Linux for servers is still FOSS. I think it’s great that more people are getting access to FOSS on Windows. I remember when Linux didn’t have a package manager and you had to install dependencies manually. Enabling Windows users a limited Linux experience should help encourage more Linux switchers.
- squarefoot 7y ago
  "Enabling Windows users a limited Linux experience should help encourage more Linux switchers." I really wished this was the case, however I hardly imagine Microsoft execs discussing at meetings the introduction of WSL to encourage people to switch to Linux.
  - rbanffy 7y ago
    A "limited Linux experience" has been available to Windows users since Cygwin allowed us to have bash and gcc on a Windows machine. I used it a bit in the early 2000's and extensively in 2008-2009 when I was issued my first Windows laptop in ages. Before my laptop suffered a most regrettable accident that rendered the Windows partition inoperable and forced me to switch to Linux. When hardware virtualization became available and memory became more abundant, running Linux VMs was a no-brainer. WSL2 is faster, better integrated and closer to what a Linux environment is supposed to be.

godzillabrennus 7y ago

Linux runs on more servers than desktops. Can’t imagine the licensing for server editions of Windows will take off when Linux for servers is still FOSS. I think it’s great that more people are getting access to FOSS on Windows. I remember when Linux didn’t have a package manager and you had to install dependencies manually. Enabling Windows users a limited Linux experience should help encourage more Linux switchers.

squarefoot 7y ago
"Enabling Windows users a limited Linux experience should help encourage more Linux switchers." I really wished this was the case, however I hardly imagine Microsoft execs discussing at meetings the introduction of WSL to encourage people to switch to Linux.
- rbanffy 7y ago
  A "limited Linux experience" has been available to Windows users since Cygwin allowed us to have bash and gcc on a Windows machine. I used it a bit in the early 2000's and extensively in 2008-2009 when I was issued my first Windows laptop in ages. Before my laptop suffered a most regrettable accident that rendered the Windows partition inoperable and forced me to switch to Linux. When hardware virtualization became available and memory became more abundant, running Linux VMs was a no-brainer. WSL2 is faster, better integrated and closer to what a Linux environment is supposed to be.