3 ms·

Microsoft has a history of anti-competitive practices that crippled the industry. In either case, serious objections are justified and severe handling of one ca

• monocasa 6y ago
  There's been Microsoft levels of anticompetitive practices from every proprietary hypervisor vendor. The others are seen as "oh, look! They're working with Linux! yay!" for a code dump across the wall (like vmware, and arguably z/VM), whereas here Microsoft appears to be doing everything right and working with upstream to modify a minimal MVP and are being lambasted for it. It feels like they're doing everything right and everything we've asked for, for decades, and being shunned for it. What's the mechanism here for Linux winning and Microsoft being allowed into the community and what should they be doing different?
  • chrsw 6y ago
    They're not doing everything right. They're doing something objectionable, like other people are also doing. Except they're being called out for it because of their reputation of having one of the most hostile anti-competitive practices the industry has ever seen. It's the price you pay for having such bad credit, even if your intentions initially seem benevolent.
    • monocasa 6y ago
      > They're not doing everything right. They're doing something objectionable What exactly? The only performant way to expose GPUs to guests while still allowing them to be used by the host (or multiple guests) for GPUs that don't have hardware support for partitioning themselves (ie. pretty much all discrete GPUs) is to replicate the ioctl layer from the host up into the guest. Any other solution is a non starter if you care about getting the perf you'd expect from the paravirtualized GPU.