11 ms·

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

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.

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.