4 ms·

What's odd - is that nobody ever decided to build a reasonable spreadsheet package, or imaging package, or heck, any of a hundred decent packages that are avail

What's odd - is that nobody ever decided to build a reasonable spreadsheet package, or imaging package, or heck, any of a hundred decent packages that are available on OS X and Windows. My day-day job is on Linux (And has so been for the last three years) - but that's because I live on a CLI, and my needs for spreadsheets/presentations are (A) Both very rudimentary, and (B) more often then not done with google docs anyways. Anybody who had, as their day job, working with spreadsheets would never do it with Libre Office unless they weren't really using them with a lot of data and complexity, or (B) had a bit of a masochistic streak. (Or, I guess (C), were completely dedicated to open software - which is a fair reason I guess). The two things that will permanently hold back Linux on the desktop (And, remember, I say this as someone who has only worked on Linux for 3+ years now) - is (A) The amazing number of inconsistencies on the desktop environment (Depending on the application, I have 3 separate ways I need to initiate a "copy" - Ctrl+C, Ctrl+Shift+C, Ctrl+Right-Click+Select copy.) and (B) The lack of most decent desktop software (Chrome, Slack excepted - they are pretty much flawless on Linux). Bringing this back to the original thread - what I would love from Microsoft, is to make Linux a first-rate citizen on Windows. Right now it's 80% of the way their with WSL. Still missing a bunch of networking stuff, and still doesn't run cron/init and friends. But It's getting closer. Then, we have the best of both worlds - I can do all my work in Linux, and still have access to the rich desktop environment of Windows. So - count me as one person who is really happy that Microsoft is putting effort into advancing their Linux offerings by submitting these Hyper-V support patches into the Linux Kernel.

severino 6y ago
Yes, I understand your position. I tend to disagree, because for me, the Windows world is not a better world: I don't specially like the Windows UI, I don't like how updates are done, I value using open-source software and I don't like my vendor to be constantly trying to make me use its software, be it Internet Explorer, Edge or Bing. But if that is the best of both worlds for you, that's great. However, I feel WSL means using Linux to enhance a product (Windows) while at the same time preventing the growth of that same system in its standalone fashion. Because WSL means you won't be using a lot of the usual Linux desktop stuff, you'll be a pure Windows user in a lot of statistical data, and you won't be helping to make Linux a better OS. Not to say that it can get worse once Microsoft starts releasing Windows-only Linux components for WSL, as (I think) started happening already.
- ghshephard 6y ago
  Actually - I think we agree a lot. I'm not a big fan of how updates are shoved down your throat and the system rebooted, (Though I do like the Fast/Slow/Preview/Full Release approach towards development that provides weekly releases if you want to live dangerous, and cautious well baked pre-releases of features 3-4 months before the public beta/full release)- much higher quality releases than the OS X Once-A-Year release). I definitely value using open-source software, not only because I find it to be higher-quality for what I do (data engineering) - but also the control and freedom I get from it. I am absolutely opposed to the Operating System vendor forcing stuff down my throat (One reason why I don't like SNAP on Ubuntu - it's kind of cruddy and forces us to use their store). Remember - I use Linux all day for a reason - it's the better tool for the job I do. But - Linux is incredibly lacking in highly-polished commercial software. I miss the dozens of beautifully crafted packages on OS X, and their somewhat less crafted variants on Windows constantly. That final finish, and careful craftsmanship that occurs from making every button, every font, every round-rec flawless - is something that, for the most parts - is completely absent on Linux. I am a contrarian when it comes to Microsoft and Linux - I genuinely believe that they are going to do the right thing (And I say this as a Former Netscape Employee who knows all to well their EEE pattern) - particularly if we get to use the full desktop experience in WSL - then we'll know they are really on the right path. But - by and large, I'm guessing we agree way more than disagree on stuff.

severino 6y ago

Yes, I understand your position. I tend to disagree, because for me, the Windows world is not a better world: I don't specially like the Windows UI, I don't like how updates are done, I value using open-source software and I don't like my vendor to be constantly trying to make me use its software, be it Internet Explorer, Edge or Bing. But if that is the best of both worlds for you, that's great. However, I feel WSL means using Linux to enhance a product (Windows) while at the same time preventing the growth of that same system in its standalone fashion. Because WSL means you won't be using a lot of the usual Linux desktop stuff, you'll be a pure Windows user in a lot of statistical data, and you won't be helping to make Linux a better OS. Not to say that it can get worse once Microsoft starts releasing Windows-only Linux components for WSL, as (I think) started happening already.

ghshephard 6y ago
Actually - I think we agree a lot. I'm not a big fan of how updates are shoved down your throat and the system rebooted, (Though I do like the Fast/Slow/Preview/Full Release approach towards development that provides weekly releases if you want to live dangerous, and cautious well baked pre-releases of features 3-4 months before the public beta/full release)- much higher quality releases than the OS X Once-A-Year release). I definitely value using open-source software, not only because I find it to be higher-quality for what I do (data engineering) - but also the control and freedom I get from it. I am absolutely opposed to the Operating System vendor forcing stuff down my throat (One reason why I don't like SNAP on Ubuntu - it's kind of cruddy and forces us to use their store). Remember - I use Linux all day for a reason - it's the better tool for the job I do. But - Linux is incredibly lacking in highly-polished commercial software. I miss the dozens of beautifully crafted packages on OS X, and their somewhat less crafted variants on Windows constantly. That final finish, and careful craftsmanship that occurs from making every button, every font, every round-rec flawless - is something that, for the most parts - is completely absent on Linux. I am a contrarian when it comes to Microsoft and Linux - I genuinely believe that they are going to do the right thing (And I say this as a Former Netscape Employee who knows all to well their EEE pattern) - particularly if we get to use the full desktop experience in WSL - then we'll know they are really on the right path. But - by and large, I'm guessing we agree way more than disagree on stuff.