7 ms·

Using WSL should be a very last resort anyway. Just use Linux straight on your hardware if you have a choice and ditch Windows.

by shmerl 6y ago

debian_lover 6y ago
This. WSL is like supergluing a BMW motor to the hood of a burned out 1999 Honda Civic. Its still going to run like garbage no matter how much you put lipstick on that pig
nikisweeting 6y ago
It's getting better all the time though, and it's way better than nothing when you don't have a choice.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Enginerrrd 6y ago
Yeah I've never understood the use case there exactly....
- shmerl 6y ago
  One use case MS thought of was to give excuse to lazy corporate IT not to support Linux on the desktop, to prevent Windows usage dropping among developers. I think that was their main intent.
Jonnax 6y ago
Why? In my opinion Linux desktop environments are terrible compared to Windows. How's the display scaling these days? Is it still a better experience to run a 4k monitor at a lower resolution? What's the Nvidia driver situation? Still janky because their drivers are doing their own thing?
- johnisgood 6y ago
  I have not experienced any NVIDIA driver related issues for over a decade. I cannot comment on the rest. I think there are great desktop environments and window managers for Linux.
- shmerl 6y ago
  Because in my opinion Windows is terrible :) For many reasons. Linux users don't use Nvidia if they are interested in the modern desktop use case. That's a well known factor. If someone migrates to Linux using Nvidia, chances are high they'll change it to AMD on the next GPU upgrade.
  - filmgirlcw 6y ago
    > Linux users don't use Nvidia if they are interested in the modern desktop use case. Which rules out anyone who wants to game or do CUDA stuff. Everyone is welcome to their own opinions and preferences, but if you ask me, if the response to a request to use the most powerful/performant graphics cards is to switch to AMD (and AMD has some good cards but Nvidia’s are better and OpenCL can’t compete with CUDA when it comes to any machine learning work), well, that’s part of why Linux’s modern desktop adoption is still so small. If the only option is to use an AMD GPU, you might as well just get a Mac and use actual UNIX. And honestly, to each their own! But you asked why anyone would use WSL2 and you’ve got a good answer: they want to be able to take advantage of their chosen hardware and access the various Linux tools.
    - shmerl 6y ago
      I didn't see an answer that explains how WSL is better than Linux proper, at least not in case when you don't care about Windows itself. AMD is fine for gaming, I'm using 5700XT on Linux for playing games. And AMD will match Nvidia higher end cards next month. So I don't see any reason to use Nvidia for that. WSL offers nothing for gaming or similar use cases that regular Linux can't. If you need to use CUDA with Nvidia hardware, you can do it on Linux proper just fine, you don't need WSL for it - Nvidia provide support.
Bedon292 6y ago
WSL is actually really good. To me, it gives you the best of both worlds. Linux for dev stuff, Windows for GUI and games. And its actual Linux, so I am dev'ing a little closer to prod than those on Macs. But that's less of a factor now everything is in Docker and we are all using the same containers. I also feel I have a superior Docker (runs on WSL2) experience to them, better interface and much better battery life. Its of course all personal opinion, but I have no desire or need to move off Windows.
- garethrowlands 6y ago
  One reason to move off of Windows would be running graphical Linux apps. But that'll change soon.
  - shmerl 6y ago
    If you are playing games on Linux, WSL doesn't help anything for sure, it only adds overhead.
    - cdash 6y ago
      Why would you ever play games on WSL when you already are on the superior platform for playing games...
      - shmerl 6y ago
        Which was exactly my point - I play them directly on Linux.
    - filmgirlcw 6y ago
      But legit question, why would you want to play a game in Linux and not in Windows? I’m not even being rhetorical, I’m genuinely curious if there are games with significantly better performance under Linux (and I’m assuming we would have to be talking about using an AMD card so I’m also curious if that performance under Linux is better than an Nvidia card under either OS), because maybe there are and I’m just totally unaware.
crb002 6y ago
WSL2 gave my Windows10 laptop new life. Sound drivers etc just work - WSL2 scales RAM/CPU with your workload. Have Kali Kex gui, AmazonLinux 2 terminal, Ubuntu 20 terminal side by side all doing their thing.
maple3142 6y ago
I use WSL just because I can have the best in both worlds, development environment in Linux and GUI, Gaming in Windows. No need to dual boot.

Using WSL should be a very last resort anyway. Just use Linux straight on your hardware if you have a choice and ditch Windows.

by shmerl 6y ago

Using WSL should be a very last resort anyway. Just use Linux straight on your hardware if you have a choice and ditch Windows.

debian_lover 6y ago

This. WSL is like supergluing a BMW motor to the hood of a burned out 1999 Honda Civic. Its still going to run like garbage no matter how much you put lipstick on that pig

nikisweeting 6y ago

It's getting better all the time though, and it's way better than nothing when you don't have a choice.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

Enginerrrd 6y ago

Yeah I've never understood the use case there exactly....

shmerl 6y ago
One use case MS thought of was to give excuse to lazy corporate IT not to support Linux on the desktop, to prevent Windows usage dropping among developers. I think that was their main intent.

Jonnax 6y ago

Why? In my opinion Linux desktop environments are terrible compared to Windows. How's the display scaling these days? Is it still a better experience to run a 4k monitor at a lower resolution? What's the Nvidia driver situation? Still janky because their drivers are doing their own thing?

johnisgood 6y ago
I have not experienced any NVIDIA driver related issues for over a decade. I cannot comment on the rest. I think there are great desktop environments and window managers for Linux.
shmerl 6y ago
Because in my opinion Windows is terrible :) For many reasons. Linux users don't use Nvidia if they are interested in the modern desktop use case. That's a well known factor. If someone migrates to Linux using Nvidia, chances are high they'll change it to AMD on the next GPU upgrade.
- filmgirlcw 6y ago
  > Linux users don't use Nvidia if they are interested in the modern desktop use case. Which rules out anyone who wants to game or do CUDA stuff. Everyone is welcome to their own opinions and preferences, but if you ask me, if the response to a request to use the most powerful/performant graphics cards is to switch to AMD (and AMD has some good cards but Nvidia’s are better and OpenCL can’t compete with CUDA when it comes to any machine learning work), well, that’s part of why Linux’s modern desktop adoption is still so small. If the only option is to use an AMD GPU, you might as well just get a Mac and use actual UNIX. And honestly, to each their own! But you asked why anyone would use WSL2 and you’ve got a good answer: they want to be able to take advantage of their chosen hardware and access the various Linux tools.
  - shmerl 6y ago
    I didn't see an answer that explains how WSL is better than Linux proper, at least not in case when you don't care about Windows itself. AMD is fine for gaming, I'm using 5700XT on Linux for playing games. And AMD will match Nvidia higher end cards next month. So I don't see any reason to use Nvidia for that. WSL offers nothing for gaming or similar use cases that regular Linux can't. If you need to use CUDA with Nvidia hardware, you can do it on Linux proper just fine, you don't need WSL for it - Nvidia provide support.

Bedon292 6y ago

WSL is actually really good. To me, it gives you the best of both worlds. Linux for dev stuff, Windows for GUI and games. And its actual Linux, so I am dev'ing a little closer to prod than those on Macs. But that's less of a factor now everything is in Docker and we are all using the same containers. I also feel I have a superior Docker (runs on WSL2) experience to them, better interface and much better battery life. Its of course all personal opinion, but I have no desire or need to move off Windows.

garethrowlands 6y ago
One reason to move off of Windows would be running graphical Linux apps. But that'll change soon.
- shmerl 6y ago
  If you are playing games on Linux, WSL doesn't help anything for sure, it only adds overhead.
  - cdash 6y ago
    Why would you ever play games on WSL when you already are on the superior platform for playing games...
    - shmerl 6y ago
      Which was exactly my point - I play them directly on Linux.
  - filmgirlcw 6y ago
    But legit question, why would you want to play a game in Linux and not in Windows? I’m not even being rhetorical, I’m genuinely curious if there are games with significantly better performance under Linux (and I’m assuming we would have to be talking about using an AMD card so I’m also curious if that performance under Linux is better than an Nvidia card under either OS), because maybe there are and I’m just totally unaware.

crb002 6y ago

WSL2 gave my Windows10 laptop new life. Sound drivers etc just work - WSL2 scales RAM/CPU with your workload. Have Kali Kex gui, AmazonLinux 2 terminal, Ubuntu 20 terminal side by side all doing their thing.

maple3142 6y ago

I use WSL just because I can have the best in both worlds, development environment in Linux and GUI, Gaming in Windows. No need to dual boot.