15 ms·

- 2021: revamped Windows Subsystem for Linux - 2024: dual support for native Linux & Windows 13 apps - 2027: Linux & Windows 15 interop support - 2030: run l

- 2021: revamped Windows Subsystem for Linux - 2024: dual support for native Linux & Windows 13 apps - 2027: Linux & Windows 15 interop support - 2030: run legacy Windows apps on Windows L (Linux)

jgilias 5y ago
One can wish. The more likely end game seems to be one where no one actually bothers using a real Linux installation, as you can do everything you'd need Linux for on your Windows machine. But your Windows machine has become a 'trusted computing' device that only boots and runs most software if it 'hasn't been tampered with'. Say, by actually installing Linux on it. Edit: Further reading here: https://secret.club/2021/06/28/windows11-tpms.html https://secret.club/2021/06/28/windows11-tpms.html
- Buttons840 5y ago
  That may be their strategy, but "Full Linux compatibility plus Windows Updates!" doesn't appeal to me, so I'll stick with pure Linux.
- beardedman 5y ago
  Hope not! But actually kind of agree with you here.
- brundolf 5y ago
  Right, they've ceded the server space to Linux but want to cement Windows' position on desktops in a Linux-server world (maybe regaining some ground from Macs in the process, since this is one of the reasons they're so popular with devs)
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    Because those devs have proven they only care about POSIX, if it Linux or something else they don't care at all, otherwise they would be giving money to Linux OEMS.
  - DeathArrow 5y ago
    But server space is increasingly replaced with cloud. And MS has Azure. They don't care about the technology if they make money from it. They used to sell an UNIX OS called Xenix.
- peakaboo 5y ago
  I guess there are few of us, but I would absolutely never use that subsystem rather than a real Linux system.
  - prirai 5y ago
    Same here, the sense of freedom is incomparable.
  - GekkePrutser 5y ago
    Neither would I, personally. But Linux is hard to manage for corporations especially when people use different distros. These things may be required by the security department. So WSL is a nice carrot there for them. Management through Windows and Linux on top of it. I worked in endpoint management so I can see the appeal. However personally I really like the way Linux is free of corporate influence. In fact I switched to FreeBSD for that reason as I feel that big IT is getting too involved with Linux.
    - wumpus 5y ago
      > But Linux is hard to manage for corporations especially when people use different distros. Last time I set up a startup, our developers all worked in the same environment as our servers.
      - GekkePrutser 5y ago
        But that's a startup, I was speaking more of enterprise (in which I work). We have much more rigid security rules, and we're also a much bigger target for bad actors.
- judge2020 5y ago
  > Did we mention that a TPM isn’t going to protect you from UEFI malware that was planted on the device by a rogue agent at manufacture time? I find this to be a pretty weak strawman, and one that not many people would consider to be part of their threat model (and if they are, they'd just purchase the part from a brick-and-mortar store so that, if there is malware, it's non-targeted). Microsoft is mostly doing this for their endpoint security enterprise customers. The objectives aren't exactly hidden, either: - Don't want anyone to be able to get data off of a bitlocker-encrypted drive[0] - Don't allow things like O365 login credentials (including temporary auth tokens) to be pulled off a drive[1] - Prevent thunderbolt 3 DMA (eg. from a rogue usb on the back of the computer)[2] And yes, they probably also don't want people to keep hacking online video games, which is why Riot uses TPM attestation as an additional security measure to preventing people banned for hacking from evading bans in Valorant[3]. 0: https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2020/11/17/meet-the-microsoft-pluton-processor-the-security-chip-designed-for-the-future-of-windows-pcs/#:~:text=which%20will%20allow%20customers%20to%20immediately%20benefit%20from%20enhanced%20security%20for%20Windows%20features%20that%20rely%20on%20TPMs%20like%20BitLocker%20and%20System%20Guard https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2020/11/17/meet-the-.... 1: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/threat-protection/windows-defender-system-guard/how-hardware-based-root-of-trust-helps-protect-windows https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/threat-pro... 2: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/information-protection/kernel-dma-protection-for-thunderbolt https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/informatio... 3: https://www.pcgamer.com/valorant-leads-the-charge-on-enforcing-windows-tpm-to-perma-ban-cheaters-hardware/ https://www.pcgamer.com/valorant-leads-the-charge-on-enforci...
  - nitrogen 5y ago
    Doesn't UEFI already provide for the automated installation of vendor malware whenever Windows boots?
  - blibble 5y ago
    > And yes, they probably also don't want people to keep hacking online video games, which is why Riot uses TPM attestation as an additional security measure to preventing people banned for hacking from evading bans in Valorant[3]. on most of my gaming boards you buy the TPM and plug it into the board like you would a USB connector total cost: ~$15 (ignoring currently craziness) if I'm a wallhacker/aimbotter how would this stop me?
- II2II 5y ago
  I am pretty sure that WSL was implemented to avoid the gradual loss of users, most of them being developers, to Linux. There is very little reason for existing Linux users to adopt Windows due to WSL.
  - pengaru 5y ago
    > WSL was implemented to avoid the gradual loss of users, most of them being developers, to Linux. They're bleeding users to MacOS, Linux desktop installs is a rounding error.
    - kyriakos 5y ago
      Been seeing a lot more developers jumping from mac to Linux and even windows lately. If something more competitive to M1 comes from amd and Intel we should expect the trend to continue. I think the tide is moving the opposite direction now than 10 years ago.
      - pjmlp 5y ago
        The software for those 10% desktop users has to be written by someone. The only developers jumping ship are the ones that only care about POSIX, no matter where it is available.
  - SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
    > to avoid the gradual loss of users But then they do things like Windows 11. Seriously has me considering Mac or Linux as a daily driver.
- gerdesj 5y ago
  But I don't want to run Windows and haven't done so for roughly 20 years. My Dell made Arch lappie runs up attested via a TPM 2.0. I boot UEFI, Secure boot to kernel and initrd.
- mr_toad 5y ago
  > you can do everything you'd need Linux for on your Windows machine On a Windows machine I’d prefer to use Azure cloud shell than WSL.
- squarefoot 5y ago
  > The more likely end game seems to be one where no one actually bothers using a real Linux installation, as you can do everything you'd need Linux for on your Windows machine. I'm 100% convinced this is Microsoft's actual goal, and it's going to succeed very quickly at least on the desktop. Then one day, when a good number of apps will conveniently require WSL to run properly, or to run at all, MS could build their own Linux distribution containing licensed parts of Windows (drivers for closed hardware, graphics libraries, etc.) de facto displacing the original Linux from every other field of application including embedded, automotive, industrial, etc.
smitty1e 5y ago
Yep. Windows will be to its Linux kernel as Aqua to Darwin. Been predicting it for years.
- fortran77 5y ago
  Impossible. Windows is a modern microkernel architecture. Linux is an Apollo-era monolith.
  - arpa 5y ago
    Oh hi mr. Tannenbaum
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      Whose creation is running happily on tons of Intel CPUs, putting Linux on its place.
      - throwaway2048 5y ago
        too bad he didn't know about it at all till a few years ago. That should tell you how much relevance it has to anyone besides Intel.
        pjmlp 5y ago
        It has the relevance that Linux needs Minix to run on Intel CPUs. As for the relevance for microkernels, they are doing alright outside desktop computers.
        arpa 5y ago
        Linux needs IME? :O
earthbee 5y ago
A new round of embrace, extend, extinguish?
- serverholic 5y ago
  They've come close already. Recently they tried adding directx compatibility extensions to linux and it created legal drama.
anon_cow1111 5y ago
- 2035: Windows no longer overwrites Grub bootloader
Noughmad 5y ago
Far more in line with their EEE tradition: - 2021: Windows Subsystem for Linux that can run pretty much any Linux program - 2024: Custom proprietary extensions in WSL, hidden "incentives" to make sure some important software runs only on WSL - 2027: Nobody uses Linux without WSL anymore - 2030: WSL now costs $200 per year.
- cwyers 5y ago
  Except Microsoft doesn't offer WSL-based hosting, and they currently don't offer their own Linux distro. This is a complement to their Azure business, basically.
  - Flameancer 5y ago
    Partly false, Microsoft does have its own Linux distribution now. https://github.com/microsoft/CBL-Mariner https://github.com/microsoft/CBL-Mariner
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      Two actually, Sphere OS uses the Linux kernel.
      - DeathArrow 5y ago
        Microsoft had an UNIX OS long time ago. It was called Xenix.
        pjmlp 5y ago
        I know, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28784116 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28784116
- gopiandcode 5y ago
  Don't forget, before the last step, they'll first subsidise universities and schools to explicitly train their students to have a dependence on WSL, so that they can maximally exploit their users when they introduce a fee.
bitwize 5y ago
Yeah, I read that erotic fanfic back when ESR wrote it: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8764 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8764 It's not going to happen. The Windows NT kernel is one of Microsoft's greatest assets; in fact it's better designed than Linux on many axes. Until recently it had better support for async I/O (and the developer experience of io_uring may still not measure up to IOCP under Windows), it was designed for multithreading, and it has a more advanced security model. It also has a more advanced driver model, which is to say it has a driver model at all. The fact that there's a standard ABI for drivers means hardware Just Works under Windows and is still incredibly fiddly under Linux. Microsoft essentially has stewardship over the entire PC platform because they play very nicely with OEMs and make hardware easy for Windows to support. They are not going to give that up. It'd be the OS-kernel equivalent of giving up Alpha for Itanium. If anything, the future of Linux is to be a guest under Windows NT. How many Hackernews have I heard repeat the mantra that the best Linux desktop environment is WSL?
- Schwartzhog 5y ago
  Self serving cyber waffle, if you don't mind me saying so bill ;]
- mr_toad 5y ago
  The future of Linux is the cloud, and servers, and routers and IOT devices and well, everything except corporate desktops.
- ElectricalUnion 5y ago
  > hardware Just Works under Windows > Microsoft essentially has stewardship over the entire PC platform [citation needed]
  - ThrowawayR2 5y ago
    Microsoft defines the hardware specification for Windows compatible x86 and all the OEMs that manufacture x86 servers (even ones most likely destined to never run anything other than Linux), desktops, and laptops certify against it. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/design/compatibility/whcp-specifications-policies https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/design/com... https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/test/hlk/ https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/test/hlk/ There are no other standards for what a PC is. All of the open OSes, including Linux, just piggyback on Microsoft's standard. (And if anyone believes that the various giants building custom ARM processors aren't hoping that they can get dominance based on their own spec so that they can displace Microsoft and wield the same power, think again.)
syshum 5y ago
That would only happen if sometime between 2027 and 2030 they buy out both Linus and the Linux Foundation, re-write all GPL code not owned by the Foundation, and re license Linux to some other license other than GPL.
- DeathArrow 5y ago
  I think it would be much easier to just design another POSIX compatible OS and give users some incentive over Linux: stable ABI, stable API, software and hardware that just works out of the box and don't need configuration and maintenance.
Koshkin 5y ago
You can install Wine on Linux today.

- 2021: revamped Windows Subsystem for Linux - 2024: dual support for native Linux & Windows 13 apps - 2027: Linux & Windows 15 interop support - 2030: run legacy Windows apps on Windows L (Linux)

jgilias 5y ago

One can wish. The more likely end game seems to be one where no one actually bothers using a real Linux installation, as you can do everything you'd need Linux for on your Windows machine. But your Windows machine has become a 'trusted computing' device that only boots and runs most software if it 'hasn't been tampered with'. Say, by actually installing Linux on it. Edit: Further reading here: https://secret.club/2021/06/28/windows11-tpms.html https://secret.club/2021/06/28/windows11-tpms.html

Buttons840 5y ago
That may be their strategy, but "Full Linux compatibility plus Windows Updates!" doesn't appeal to me, so I'll stick with pure Linux.
beardedman 5y ago
Hope not! But actually kind of agree with you here.
brundolf 5y ago
Right, they've ceded the server space to Linux but want to cement Windows' position on desktops in a Linux-server world (maybe regaining some ground from Macs in the process, since this is one of the reasons they're so popular with devs)
- pjmlp 5y ago
  Because those devs have proven they only care about POSIX, if it Linux or something else they don't care at all, otherwise they would be giving money to Linux OEMS.
- DeathArrow 5y ago
  But server space is increasingly replaced with cloud. And MS has Azure. They don't care about the technology if they make money from it. They used to sell an UNIX OS called Xenix.
peakaboo 5y ago
I guess there are few of us, but I would absolutely never use that subsystem rather than a real Linux system.
- prirai 5y ago
  Same here, the sense of freedom is incomparable.
- GekkePrutser 5y ago
  Neither would I, personally. But Linux is hard to manage for corporations especially when people use different distros. These things may be required by the security department. So WSL is a nice carrot there for them. Management through Windows and Linux on top of it. I worked in endpoint management so I can see the appeal. However personally I really like the way Linux is free of corporate influence. In fact I switched to FreeBSD for that reason as I feel that big IT is getting too involved with Linux.
  - wumpus 5y ago
    > But Linux is hard to manage for corporations especially when people use different distros. Last time I set up a startup, our developers all worked in the same environment as our servers.
    - GekkePrutser 5y ago
      But that's a startup, I was speaking more of enterprise (in which I work). We have much more rigid security rules, and we're also a much bigger target for bad actors.
judge2020 5y ago
> Did we mention that a TPM isn’t going to protect you from UEFI malware that was planted on the device by a rogue agent at manufacture time? I find this to be a pretty weak strawman, and one that not many people would consider to be part of their threat model (and if they are, they'd just purchase the part from a brick-and-mortar store so that, if there is malware, it's non-targeted). Microsoft is mostly doing this for their endpoint security enterprise customers. The objectives aren't exactly hidden, either: - Don't want anyone to be able to get data off of a bitlocker-encrypted drive[0] - Don't allow things like O365 login credentials (including temporary auth tokens) to be pulled off a drive[1] - Prevent thunderbolt 3 DMA (eg. from a rogue usb on the back of the computer)[2] And yes, they probably also don't want people to keep hacking online video games, which is why Riot uses TPM attestation as an additional security measure to preventing people banned for hacking from evading bans in Valorant[3]. 0: https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2020/11/17/meet-the-microsoft-pluton-processor-the-security-chip-designed-for-the-future-of-windows-pcs/#:~:text=which%20will%20allow%20customers%20to%20immediately%20benefit%20from%20enhanced%20security%20for%20Windows%20features%20that%20rely%20on%20TPMs%20like%20BitLocker%20and%20System%20Guard https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2020/11/17/meet-the-.... 1: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/threat-protection/windows-defender-system-guard/how-hardware-based-root-of-trust-helps-protect-windows https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/threat-pro... 2: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/information-protection/kernel-dma-protection-for-thunderbolt https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/informatio... 3: https://www.pcgamer.com/valorant-leads-the-charge-on-enforcing-windows-tpm-to-perma-ban-cheaters-hardware/ https://www.pcgamer.com/valorant-leads-the-charge-on-enforci...
- nitrogen 5y ago
  Doesn't UEFI already provide for the automated installation of vendor malware whenever Windows boots?
- blibble 5y ago
  > And yes, they probably also don't want people to keep hacking online video games, which is why Riot uses TPM attestation as an additional security measure to preventing people banned for hacking from evading bans in Valorant[3]. on most of my gaming boards you buy the TPM and plug it into the board like you would a USB connector total cost: ~$15 (ignoring currently craziness) if I'm a wallhacker/aimbotter how would this stop me?
II2II 5y ago
I am pretty sure that WSL was implemented to avoid the gradual loss of users, most of them being developers, to Linux. There is very little reason for existing Linux users to adopt Windows due to WSL.
- pengaru 5y ago
  > WSL was implemented to avoid the gradual loss of users, most of them being developers, to Linux. They're bleeding users to MacOS, Linux desktop installs is a rounding error.
  - kyriakos 5y ago
    Been seeing a lot more developers jumping from mac to Linux and even windows lately. If something more competitive to M1 comes from amd and Intel we should expect the trend to continue. I think the tide is moving the opposite direction now than 10 years ago.
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      The software for those 10% desktop users has to be written by someone. The only developers jumping ship are the ones that only care about POSIX, no matter where it is available.
- SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
  > to avoid the gradual loss of users But then they do things like Windows 11. Seriously has me considering Mac or Linux as a daily driver.
gerdesj 5y ago
But I don't want to run Windows and haven't done so for roughly 20 years. My Dell made Arch lappie runs up attested via a TPM 2.0. I boot UEFI, Secure boot to kernel and initrd.
mr_toad 5y ago
> you can do everything you'd need Linux for on your Windows machine On a Windows machine I’d prefer to use Azure cloud shell than WSL.
squarefoot 5y ago
> The more likely end game seems to be one where no one actually bothers using a real Linux installation, as you can do everything you'd need Linux for on your Windows machine. I'm 100% convinced this is Microsoft's actual goal, and it's going to succeed very quickly at least on the desktop. Then one day, when a good number of apps will conveniently require WSL to run properly, or to run at all, MS could build their own Linux distribution containing licensed parts of Windows (drivers for closed hardware, graphics libraries, etc.) de facto displacing the original Linux from every other field of application including embedded, automotive, industrial, etc.

smitty1e 5y ago

Yep. Windows will be to its Linux kernel as Aqua to Darwin. Been predicting it for years.

fortran77 5y ago
Impossible. Windows is a modern microkernel architecture. Linux is an Apollo-era monolith.
- arpa 5y ago
  Oh hi mr. Tannenbaum
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    Whose creation is running happily on tons of Intel CPUs, putting Linux on its place.
    - throwaway2048 5y ago
      too bad he didn't know about it at all till a few years ago. That should tell you how much relevance it has to anyone besides Intel.
      - pjmlp 5y ago
        It has the relevance that Linux needs Minix to run on Intel CPUs. As for the relevance for microkernels, they are doing alright outside desktop computers.
        arpa 5y ago
        Linux needs IME? :O

earthbee 5y ago

A new round of embrace, extend, extinguish?

serverholic 5y ago
They've come close already. Recently they tried adding directx compatibility extensions to linux and it created legal drama.

anon_cow1111 5y ago

- 2035: Windows no longer overwrites Grub bootloader

Noughmad 5y ago

Far more in line with their EEE tradition: - 2021: Windows Subsystem for Linux that can run pretty much any Linux program - 2024: Custom proprietary extensions in WSL, hidden "incentives" to make sure some important software runs only on WSL - 2027: Nobody uses Linux without WSL anymore - 2030: WSL now costs $200 per year.

cwyers 5y ago
Except Microsoft doesn't offer WSL-based hosting, and they currently don't offer their own Linux distro. This is a complement to their Azure business, basically.
- Flameancer 5y ago
  Partly false, Microsoft does have its own Linux distribution now. https://github.com/microsoft/CBL-Mariner https://github.com/microsoft/CBL-Mariner
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    Two actually, Sphere OS uses the Linux kernel.
    - DeathArrow 5y ago
      Microsoft had an UNIX OS long time ago. It was called Xenix.
      - pjmlp 5y ago
        I know, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28784116 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28784116
gopiandcode 5y ago
Don't forget, before the last step, they'll first subsidise universities and schools to explicitly train their students to have a dependence on WSL, so that they can maximally exploit their users when they introduce a fee.

bitwize 5y ago

Yeah, I read that erotic fanfic back when ESR wrote it: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8764 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8764 It's not going to happen. The Windows NT kernel is one of Microsoft's greatest assets; in fact it's better designed than Linux on many axes. Until recently it had better support for async I/O (and the developer experience of io_uring may still not measure up to IOCP under Windows), it was designed for multithreading, and it has a more advanced security model. It also has a more advanced driver model, which is to say it has a driver model at all. The fact that there's a standard ABI for drivers means hardware Just Works under Windows and is still incredibly fiddly under Linux. Microsoft essentially has stewardship over the entire PC platform because they play very nicely with OEMs and make hardware easy for Windows to support. They are not going to give that up. It'd be the OS-kernel equivalent of giving up Alpha for Itanium. If anything, the future of Linux is to be a guest under Windows NT. How many Hackernews have I heard repeat the mantra that the best Linux desktop environment is WSL?

Schwartzhog 5y ago
Self serving cyber waffle, if you don't mind me saying so bill ;]
mr_toad 5y ago
The future of Linux is the cloud, and servers, and routers and IOT devices and well, everything except corporate desktops.
ElectricalUnion 5y ago
> hardware Just Works under Windows > Microsoft essentially has stewardship over the entire PC platform [citation needed]
- ThrowawayR2 5y ago
  Microsoft defines the hardware specification for Windows compatible x86 and all the OEMs that manufacture x86 servers (even ones most likely destined to never run anything other than Linux), desktops, and laptops certify against it. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/design/compatibility/whcp-specifications-policies https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/design/com... https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/test/hlk/ https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/test/hlk/ There are no other standards for what a PC is. All of the open OSes, including Linux, just piggyback on Microsoft's standard. (And if anyone believes that the various giants building custom ARM processors aren't hoping that they can get dominance based on their own spec so that they can displace Microsoft and wield the same power, think again.)

syshum 5y ago

That would only happen if sometime between 2027 and 2030 they buy out both Linus and the Linux Foundation, re-write all GPL code not owned by the Foundation, and re license Linux to some other license other than GPL.

DeathArrow 5y ago
I think it would be much easier to just design another POSIX compatible OS and give users some incentive over Linux: stable ABI, stable API, software and hardware that just works out of the box and don't need configuration and maintenance.

Koshkin 5y ago

You can install Wine on Linux today.