4 ms·

Correct me if I'm wrong but unlike your point 2, doesn't WSL make the Linux kernel obsolete in the long run? That'd be the Extinguish part which is still far be

Correct me if I'm wrong but unlike your point 2, doesn't WSL make the Linux kernel obsolete in the long run? That'd be the Extinguish part which is still far beyond the horizon but isn't it something worth thinking about?

maple3142 6y ago
This may be true in WSL 1, but WSL 2 uses actual Linux kernel, it won't be a problem. Instead, what will be affected is Linux Desktop.
thejsa 6y ago
Not so much with WSL 2, which Microsoft are focusing on at the moment; WSL 2 runs a real Linux kernel in a lightweight Hyper-V VM with lots of jazzy integration services.
tsimionescu 6y ago
That was a short, interesting test but WSL is now a Linux VM with nice integration in Windows. So no, it doesn't obsolete the kernel in any way. If anything, abandoning WSL1 can be considered proof that MS with doesn't have enough interest in replacing the Linux kernel.
kyriakos 6y ago
Microsoft knows that most server applications end up running on Linux and not on Windows. The Linux kernel is not going anywhere, MS is ensuring it doesn't lose more developers to competing OSs. At the same time staying loyal to MS probably also means if you need Linux on a the cloud you'll opt for Azure instead of AWS or Google.
jakogut 6y ago
WSL2 actually uses a virtualized Linux kernel, as opposed to WSL1, which implemented Linux APIs on top of Windows, a la Wine. Here's the source (literally). https://github.com/microsoft/WSL2-Linux-Kernel https://github.com/microsoft/WSL2-Linux-Kernel
baq 6y ago
Actually it’s more likely to go the other way around. What do you need the windows kernel for if almost everything is cross platform now and/or has a compatibility API layer?
jodrellblank 6y ago
> That'd be the Extinguish part And how exactly are Microsoft going to force you - particularly you, personally - to stop running your own Linux kernel? This is the same kind of ridiculous fear as any other -ism, as if lots of black people around will turn you black, or lots of gay people around will turn you gay, or lots of Muslims around will turn you Muslim.
- GekkePrutser 6y ago
  By adding so many features to the WSL experience that (at least for their intended use case) using native Linux is such as strap ball that it falls into disuse
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Destkop Linux has had 30 years to provide such experience. Apparently the large majority is fine with POSIX CLI, tiling window managers and some Electron apps thrown in.
  - jodrellblank 6y ago
    Microsoft making a good WSL will not change the Linux you have right now. Fearing that the Linux you have right now will "fall into disuse" means fearing that you will stop using it and you can choose to continue using it no matter what Microsoft does. A less charitable read of your position is that Microsoft will tempt other people away and they will no longer give you cost-free updates. Of course you don't mean that.

maple3142 6y ago

This may be true in WSL 1, but WSL 2 uses actual Linux kernel, it won't be a problem. Instead, what will be affected is Linux Desktop.

thejsa 6y ago

Not so much with WSL 2, which Microsoft are focusing on at the moment; WSL 2 runs a real Linux kernel in a lightweight Hyper-V VM with lots of jazzy integration services.

tsimionescu 6y ago

That was a short, interesting test but WSL is now a Linux VM with nice integration in Windows. So no, it doesn't obsolete the kernel in any way. If anything, abandoning WSL1 can be considered proof that MS with doesn't have enough interest in replacing the Linux kernel.

kyriakos 6y ago

Microsoft knows that most server applications end up running on Linux and not on Windows. The Linux kernel is not going anywhere, MS is ensuring it doesn't lose more developers to competing OSs. At the same time staying loyal to MS probably also means if you need Linux on a the cloud you'll opt for Azure instead of AWS or Google.

jakogut 6y ago

WSL2 actually uses a virtualized Linux kernel, as opposed to WSL1, which implemented Linux APIs on top of Windows, a la Wine. Here's the source (literally). https://github.com/microsoft/WSL2-Linux-Kernel https://github.com/microsoft/WSL2-Linux-Kernel

baq 6y ago

Actually it’s more likely to go the other way around. What do you need the windows kernel for if almost everything is cross platform now and/or has a compatibility API layer?

jodrellblank 6y ago

> That'd be the Extinguish part And how exactly are Microsoft going to force you - particularly you, personally - to stop running your own Linux kernel? This is the same kind of ridiculous fear as any other -ism, as if lots of black people around will turn you black, or lots of gay people around will turn you gay, or lots of Muslims around will turn you Muslim.

GekkePrutser 6y ago
By adding so many features to the WSL experience that (at least for their intended use case) using native Linux is such as strap ball that it falls into disuse
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Destkop Linux has had 30 years to provide such experience. Apparently the large majority is fine with POSIX CLI, tiling window managers and some Electron apps thrown in.
- jodrellblank 6y ago
  Microsoft making a good WSL will not change the Linux you have right now. Fearing that the Linux you have right now will "fall into disuse" means fearing that you will stop using it and you can choose to continue using it no matter what Microsoft does. A less charitable read of your position is that Microsoft will tempt other people away and they will no longer give you cost-free updates. Of course you don't mean that.