3 ms·

I already asked this in the past, and want to ask again. Is Microsoft a corporation of goodness now?

by avodonosov 5y ago

0des 5y ago
Embrace Extend <-- you are here Extinguish
- lghh 5y ago
  What are they extending? What functionality does this add to Linux that is only available on Windows?
  - spystath 5y ago
    One is their DirectX extension that only works on WSL2. It allows you to access the DX API through a shim driver. You can now have a Linux application that needs access to /dev/xdg which is only available in WSL2. https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/directx-heart-linux/ https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/directx-heart-linux/
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
villasv 5y ago
Asking if a publicly traded company this big is good or bad is pointless. A corporation is psychopathic; if it goes Patrick Bateman or Dexter Morgan depends on the environment. The current environment incentivizes expanding the developer ecosystem, hence DX investments.
cybernautique 5y ago
In my opinion, this is actually a question of values. My position: absolutely not, but I take it as axiomatic that Microsoft (et al.) are incapable of any actual "good." This is simply Window's attempt to build a new walled garden. If they were actually serious about advancing the state of civil computing, they'd make the NT core available as a microkernel that can be modularly placed into the Linux ecosystem. That is the _one_ thing I can think of which might raise my opinion of them (and I'm sure they lose sleep at night, knowing they haven't got my endorsement).
- p_j_w 5y ago
  I'm of a similar opinion. If they want to prove that they heart Linux, that's what they're going to have to do. Or, at the very least, document everything (including DX) so that the Wine devs can do their thing even if MS don't care to help. Until then, "MS <3 Linux" is nothing more than PR speak in my mind.
  - cybernautique 5y ago
    Absolutely agreed. Microsoft is not a pleasure to develop with, which is (in my opinion) a losing position with time. They see what Linux makes a pleasure, so they pursue the trappings of the community while damning the spirit of cooperation. Cynically, I see their moves as nothing more than an attempt to capture social capital. Hopefully, nobody is having the wool pulled over their eyes. Don't get me wrong: their incorporation of a TTY-like interface into CMD, and the Linuxification of Powershell, demonstrate the craftsmanship that Microsoft pride themselves on. It's good tech, but tainted. I will never trust Microsoft after the RDP fiasco.
- avodonosov 5y ago
  Why this should be exactly microkernel?
  - cybernautique 5y ago
    Perhaps it needn't be; I, with my negligible OS dev experience, just like microkernel architectures better. It seems more sensible to have microkernels managed by a microkernel loader. This might be an opinion I come to recant in time. The core of my position is that Microsoft needs to stop doing Microsoft things if they want to be taken seriously as a good faith actor, but I'm not holding my breath. Until they make moves to break down the walls of their garden, they're just another barrier.
    - avodonosov 5y ago
      Providing POSIX and Linux-specific APIs does actually place them into Linux ecosystem. Programs bult for Linux suddenly can be run for Windows users. That's a boost in adoption potential for Linux programs (large part of the ecosystem). And adoption is very impotant for further development and success of software. On the other hand, for Linux users this makes Windows more attractive - why not choose Windows for your next laptop, if all your Linux software runs there. That undermines Linux userbase. But overall, I feel WSL is good for Linux.
screye 5y ago
Balmer was their wake up call. A lot of destructive policies that ensure short term benefits destroy long term sustainability. They are good, just as any public can be good company. IE. Just a little bit more sensible about cooperation instead of demolition.
markus_zhang 5y ago
Please define what is good.
burkaman 5y ago
Microsoft is a group of 180,000 people, it's too big to be classified like that. A small subset of them are making this cool thing, and you can debate whether or not their intentions are good, but that's about as far as you can go in making a broad moral judgement.
jayd16 5y ago
Hmm probably closer to true neutral.
monocasa 5y ago
Microsoft has just shifted to being what IBM was in that late 90s for all intents and purposes. IBM didn't care what you ran on their platforms, even at the OS level. They just wanted that sweet sweet support contract and computer leasing money. "You want to run Linux on our mainframes? Hell yeah, sign here." Now with Azure, Microsoft gets money of the same shape, and correspondingly makes some of the same strategic choices.

I already asked this in the past, and want to ask again. Is Microsoft a corporation of goodness now?

0des 5y ago

Embrace Extend <-- you are here Extinguish

lghh 5y ago
What are they extending? What functionality does this add to Linux that is only available on Windows?
- spystath 5y ago
  One is their DirectX extension that only works on WSL2. It allows you to access the DX API through a shim driver. You can now have a Linux application that needs access to /dev/xdg which is only available in WSL2. https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/directx-heart-linux/ https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/directx-heart-linux/
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

villasv 5y ago

Asking if a publicly traded company this big is good or bad is pointless. A corporation is psychopathic; if it goes Patrick Bateman or Dexter Morgan depends on the environment. The current environment incentivizes expanding the developer ecosystem, hence DX investments.

cybernautique 5y ago

In my opinion, this is actually a question of values. My position: absolutely not, but I take it as axiomatic that Microsoft (et al.) are incapable of any actual "good." This is simply Window's attempt to build a new walled garden. If they were actually serious about advancing the state of civil computing, they'd make the NT core available as a microkernel that can be modularly placed into the Linux ecosystem. That is the _one_ thing I can think of which might raise my opinion of them (and I'm sure they lose sleep at night, knowing they haven't got my endorsement).

p_j_w 5y ago
I'm of a similar opinion. If they want to prove that they heart Linux, that's what they're going to have to do. Or, at the very least, document everything (including DX) so that the Wine devs can do their thing even if MS don't care to help. Until then, "MS <3 Linux" is nothing more than PR speak in my mind.
- cybernautique 5y ago
  Absolutely agreed. Microsoft is not a pleasure to develop with, which is (in my opinion) a losing position with time. They see what Linux makes a pleasure, so they pursue the trappings of the community while damning the spirit of cooperation. Cynically, I see their moves as nothing more than an attempt to capture social capital. Hopefully, nobody is having the wool pulled over their eyes. Don't get me wrong: their incorporation of a TTY-like interface into CMD, and the Linuxification of Powershell, demonstrate the craftsmanship that Microsoft pride themselves on. It's good tech, but tainted. I will never trust Microsoft after the RDP fiasco.
avodonosov 5y ago
Why this should be exactly microkernel?
- cybernautique 5y ago
  Perhaps it needn't be; I, with my negligible OS dev experience, just like microkernel architectures better. It seems more sensible to have microkernels managed by a microkernel loader. This might be an opinion I come to recant in time. The core of my position is that Microsoft needs to stop doing Microsoft things if they want to be taken seriously as a good faith actor, but I'm not holding my breath. Until they make moves to break down the walls of their garden, they're just another barrier.
  - avodonosov 5y ago
    Providing POSIX and Linux-specific APIs does actually place them into Linux ecosystem. Programs bult for Linux suddenly can be run for Windows users. That's a boost in adoption potential for Linux programs (large part of the ecosystem). And adoption is very impotant for further development and success of software. On the other hand, for Linux users this makes Windows more attractive - why not choose Windows for your next laptop, if all your Linux software runs there. That undermines Linux userbase. But overall, I feel WSL is good for Linux.

screye 5y ago

Balmer was their wake up call. A lot of destructive policies that ensure short term benefits destroy long term sustainability. They are good, just as any public can be good company. IE. Just a little bit more sensible about cooperation instead of demolition.

markus_zhang 5y ago

Please define what is good.

burkaman 5y ago

Microsoft is a group of 180,000 people, it's too big to be classified like that. A small subset of them are making this cool thing, and you can debate whether or not their intentions are good, but that's about as far as you can go in making a broad moral judgement.

jayd16 5y ago

Hmm probably closer to true neutral.

monocasa 5y ago

Microsoft has just shifted to being what IBM was in that late 90s for all intents and purposes. IBM didn't care what you ran on their platforms, even at the OS level. They just wanted that sweet sweet support contract and computer leasing money. "You want to run Linux on our mainframes? Hell yeah, sign here." Now with Azure, Microsoft gets money of the same shape, and correspondingly makes some of the same strategic choices.