5 ms·

Unfortunately another of their strength lies in the 3rd part: "extinguish". It's only a matter of time before their recent software of WSL, GitHub and Android o

by ajvs 5y ago

Unfortunately another of their strength lies in the 3rd part: "extinguish". It's only a matter of time before their recent software of WSL, GitHub and Android on Windows becomes yet another walled garden.

criddell 5y ago
So you're saying it's only a matter of time before Windows, which is 35 years old, might become a walled garden?
- sangnoir 5y ago
  > So you're saying it's only a matter of time before Windows, which is 35 years old, might become a walled garden? Yes - Microsoft had credible plans to wall-off app installation via an iOS-stye app store. Valve considered this threat to be viable enough, they developed SteamOS and promoted Steam Machines. Since then, Microsoft has continued its cryptographic crusade to plug all avenues for loading software that's not Microsoft-approved from pre-boot, right up to the userland. Currently, Microsoft already have a turnkey walled garden
- unicornporn 5y ago
  I find that the argument embedded in that question isn't very insightful. The developments of personal computing since subscription applications became prevalent and app stores were integrated into operating systems has made things quite different from the era that preceded this one. Apple used to sell OS upgrades. Today you can basically run Windows 10 for free. The revenue streams are different these days and they have plenty of incentives to turn your OS into a mall.
  - criddell 5y ago
    Windows has essentially always been free. There have been something like two billion PCs sold running Windows. The number of people who purchased a non-OEM copy is relatively small.
    - treesknees 5y ago
      But I believe upgrades have always been an extra purchase until Windows 8? Nowadays it's free OS, free upgrades to get you in the door and buy their services (M365 for Microsoft, iCloud/apps for Apple.)
      - smileybarry 5y ago
        Until Windows 10 IIRC, Windows 8 was also a paid upgrade. Windows 8.1 acted like a service pack so it wasn't until 10 that upgrades became free, in a way. (Unless you're an enterprise customer, in which case 10 wasn't free either)
      - Kye 5y ago
        I know at least Windows ME and Windows 98 SE came in boxes.
    - tonoto 5y ago
      Free as in price? The price tag to customers didn't exactly mention the Windows fee, but the very few vendors that sold PC's without Windows pre-installed had a lower price on those options. Luckily many vendors seem to have concluded that Windows is not a sales argument anymore. Free as in freedom? MS has tried to block out Linux from beeing installed through various chips and methods.
- drcode 5y ago
  It is a walled garden since its inception. There is no package manager for building an open package ecosystem, as exists on other OSes.
  - TinkersW 5y ago
    I'd say the OS, rather than a language, having a package manager is more of a walled garden..
    - encryptluks2 5y ago
      No it isn't. You can still install and even build packages using the manifest separately. It is just convenience, but doesn't prevent you from installing them yourself.
      - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
        Prevent, no. However making your promoted paradigm of software installation rely on repos and package maintainers has lead to practices that make it unlikely that you will find any given piece of software in a form you can just drop onto your system and have it run. If you're really lucky there's a static version or an AppImage, if you're unlucky you're pulling down a docker container of someone's build environment and compiling it yourself, if you're really unlucky you have to do without the docker container.
        encryptluks2 5y ago
        That is on software developers, many of which refuse to package their software. There are Snaps, Appimages, Flatpaks, etc. Free software isn't like Windows where developers are always packaging their software. Package managers don't impact this whatsoever, and what you're basically complaining about is that unpaid contributors make something easier for people that they wouldn't otherwise be able to easily do without them.
        5y ago
- babypuncher 5y ago
  I think this is really unlikely. PC gaming is an increasingly important market for Windows in the consumer space. As more casual users abandon conventional PCs for increasingly capable tablets and smartphones, PC gaming is only becoming and even bigger piece of the pie. The day Microsoft announces that the next version of Windows will be wholly incompatible with player's existing libraries is the day Windows ceases to be relevant to this market. Suddenly, Wine and Proton on Linux go from being "pretty good, but real Windows works better" to being the best option by a mile. And this is without mentioning how important legacy support is to enterprise customers. A whole lot of the jank and inconsistent UI designs present in Windows 11 is there because enterprise customers still use old software that relies on old features and APIs.
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
    The ace in the hole is TPM. What happens when Microsoft starts shipping a TPM based anticheat and DRM? That would destroy Proton forever and allow them to lockdown Windows.
    - smileybarry 5y ago
      That's already a problem with kernel-based anticheats, they can't run in Wine/Proton. For that, you have Valve stepping in and working with anti-cheat companies to find some middleground for Linux: https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/valve-making-linux-anti-cheat-reality-for-steam-deck-launch https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/valve-making-linux-anti-c...
      - sudosysgen 5y ago
        These anticheats are being ported to Linux by valve. If it was Microsoft's anticheat working in a TPM itbwoiodht impossible. Also, Microsoft is already a DRM vendor with the Windows Store.
  - greggman3 5y ago
    I can't wait for that day! Haha! Well, I'm crossing my fingers the Valve Steam Deck satisfies my PC gaming needs (probably not though). I hate Hate HATE that more and more games are wanting to install System level services. It's absolutely not acceptable for the same machine my financial info and other sensative info is on has apps digging deep into the system. I could run 2 machines but that's also a PITA, maintaining both machines and trying to decide when to use one vs the other. A gaming machine is powerful but I also need that power for video editing and other things. 2 VR rigs, one for non-gaming, one for gaming, would also suck. etc.... I want Windows to lockdown like Mac (and sure, you can turn it off?) but I'd like apps not to be able to muck with the system. Games have no excuse IMO.
- mattnewton 5y ago
  I think they kinda tried with the windows store + arm windows surfaces. The market didn't like it.
  - LASR 5y ago
    To be fair, those Windows RT tablets were complete garbage. I was working at Microsoft when they came out and they handed them out for free to every employee. Due to the lack of any meaningful apps (not even Chrome), the thing was DOA. IE11 was the only option for browsing.
madeofpalk 5y ago
WSL I struggle to see how WSL could ever be a walled garden. THe only reason it exists is because server infra (including a bunch of Azure!) runs linux, and loads of development workflows are linux-only. The moment you add something "windows specific" to Linux you prevent it from actually being used because then you can't deploy it.
babypuncher 5y ago
I really don't see how their Android app support or WSL could realistically go from extend to extinguish. I don't think Microsoft's MO is to completely dominate your entire stack anymore. They just want to make sure they form some critical piece of it so you can't get rid of them.
- jimmygrapes 5y ago
  The most effective virus is not that which kills its host, but makes the host dependent upon the virus
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
  If Microsoft extends their Android implementation to provide new features before Android itself does, and these features become popular, then all Microsoft would have to do is start putting out their own "Android" phones to begin eating the market. WSL, I'll admit, will be trickier to convert. However, they have decades of experience at this so don't put it past them to figure it out.
  - WorldMaker 5y ago
    Given Microsoft is using/embracing Amazon's replacements for "Google Play Services" isn't the threat here more that Amazon might finally extend Android after a decade of trying and failing? (Whether or not you agree that "Google Play Services" is already that EEE play, the incumbent, seemingly not going anywhere, and Microsoft/Amazon are playing underdog in this game.)
jodrellblank 5y ago
How does "someone can install Linux in a VM on Windows"[1] translate into "ajvs won't be able to use Linux anymore"? I don't see how you can make such a claim with a straight face. [1] WSL is based on Hyper-V virtual machines.
- teddyfrozevelt 5y ago
  They're already doing it with WSL specific features such as the DirectX driver. https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/directx-heart-linux/ https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/directx-heart-linux/
  - jodrellblank 5y ago
    Explain how "Microsoft puts a DirectX in WSL" stops you from running Linux in future? Because it really doesn't seem like it will affect you or what you can do in any way at all.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
      1. MS adds directx to WSL 2. People write "Linux" apps that require directx 3. Linux technically stays an option but is unable to run apps without NT underneath, and nobody writes plain Linux apps because of market effects Weak because people could still write apps for just Linux, plausible because convincing people to divert effort to the MS way would work and is classic EEE.
      - anaganisk 5y ago
        No one in their right mind would right linux apps targeted to run WSL only. Even if they do, it would never capture the market of pure linux. Also any modifications done to linux should be GPLd hence i don’t think thats a problem either.
      - jodrellblank 5y ago
        Your use of "extinguish" describes a situation where you can use exactly what you have now, in exactly the way you're doing now? And the terrible thing which "extinguish" means to you is "future people who might have given me free stuff might not, and it will be Microsoft's fault"? And not only that, but the way MS will "convince people to divert effort" is by making something people want more? And that is somehow terribly unfair? From Wikipedia: > "Extinguish: When extensions become a de facto standard because of their dominant market share, they marginalize competitors that do not or cannot support the new extensions." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis... The current world is that there are programs written for Linux distributions with certain subsystems (audio, window manager, systemd, etc) which don't work on other distributions without those subsystems. People who ignore binary blob video card drivers, etc. A Microsoft Ubuntu with DirectX that only runs in WSL would be just another thing like that. It would be practically no different to "macOS is UNIX but you can't run all macOS programs on other Unixes" which hasn't extinguished Linux or Unix. Even moreso when people who want to write for DirectX can do so for Windows. Why would those people target DirectX on Linux which only runs on WSL? And if it doesn't only run on WSL, let's say DirectX on Linux works on any Ubuntu and Valve use it for Steam and gaming on Linux becomes massively popular by targetting DirectX for video ... how do you then connect to "nobody writes plain Linux apps because 3D games are an option" and from there to "and now despite being massively more popular, Linux is extinguished and this is bad because even though I can run literally any other distribution and write and run my own software and all previous software, I can no longer be bothered to and that's both bad and Microsoft's fault"?

by ajvs 5y ago

criddell 5y ago

So you're saying it's only a matter of time before Windows, which is 35 years old, might become a walled garden?

sangnoir 5y ago
> So you're saying it's only a matter of time before Windows, which is 35 years old, might become a walled garden? Yes - Microsoft had credible plans to wall-off app installation via an iOS-stye app store. Valve considered this threat to be viable enough, they developed SteamOS and promoted Steam Machines. Since then, Microsoft has continued its cryptographic crusade to plug all avenues for loading software that's not Microsoft-approved from pre-boot, right up to the userland. Currently, Microsoft already have a turnkey walled garden
unicornporn 5y ago
I find that the argument embedded in that question isn't very insightful. The developments of personal computing since subscription applications became prevalent and app stores were integrated into operating systems has made things quite different from the era that preceded this one. Apple used to sell OS upgrades. Today you can basically run Windows 10 for free. The revenue streams are different these days and they have plenty of incentives to turn your OS into a mall.
- criddell 5y ago
  Windows has essentially always been free. There have been something like two billion PCs sold running Windows. The number of people who purchased a non-OEM copy is relatively small.
  - treesknees 5y ago
    But I believe upgrades have always been an extra purchase until Windows 8? Nowadays it's free OS, free upgrades to get you in the door and buy their services (M365 for Microsoft, iCloud/apps for Apple.)
    - smileybarry 5y ago
      Until Windows 10 IIRC, Windows 8 was also a paid upgrade. Windows 8.1 acted like a service pack so it wasn't until 10 that upgrades became free, in a way. (Unless you're an enterprise customer, in which case 10 wasn't free either)
    - Kye 5y ago
      I know at least Windows ME and Windows 98 SE came in boxes.
  - tonoto 5y ago
    Free as in price? The price tag to customers didn't exactly mention the Windows fee, but the very few vendors that sold PC's without Windows pre-installed had a lower price on those options. Luckily many vendors seem to have concluded that Windows is not a sales argument anymore. Free as in freedom? MS has tried to block out Linux from beeing installed through various chips and methods.
drcode 5y ago
It is a walled garden since its inception. There is no package manager for building an open package ecosystem, as exists on other OSes.
- TinkersW 5y ago
  I'd say the OS, rather than a language, having a package manager is more of a walled garden..
  - encryptluks2 5y ago
    No it isn't. You can still install and even build packages using the manifest separately. It is just convenience, but doesn't prevent you from installing them yourself.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
      Prevent, no. However making your promoted paradigm of software installation rely on repos and package maintainers has lead to practices that make it unlikely that you will find any given piece of software in a form you can just drop onto your system and have it run. If you're really lucky there's a static version or an AppImage, if you're unlucky you're pulling down a docker container of someone's build environment and compiling it yourself, if you're really unlucky you have to do without the docker container.
      - encryptluks2 5y ago
        That is on software developers, many of which refuse to package their software. There are Snaps, Appimages, Flatpaks, etc. Free software isn't like Windows where developers are always packaging their software. Package managers don't impact this whatsoever, and what you're basically complaining about is that unpaid contributors make something easier for people that they wouldn't otherwise be able to easily do without them.
        5y ago
babypuncher 5y ago
I think this is really unlikely. PC gaming is an increasingly important market for Windows in the consumer space. As more casual users abandon conventional PCs for increasingly capable tablets and smartphones, PC gaming is only becoming and even bigger piece of the pie. The day Microsoft announces that the next version of Windows will be wholly incompatible with player's existing libraries is the day Windows ceases to be relevant to this market. Suddenly, Wine and Proton on Linux go from being "pretty good, but real Windows works better" to being the best option by a mile. And this is without mentioning how important legacy support is to enterprise customers. A whole lot of the jank and inconsistent UI designs present in Windows 11 is there because enterprise customers still use old software that relies on old features and APIs.
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  The ace in the hole is TPM. What happens when Microsoft starts shipping a TPM based anticheat and DRM? That would destroy Proton forever and allow them to lockdown Windows.
  - smileybarry 5y ago
    That's already a problem with kernel-based anticheats, they can't run in Wine/Proton. For that, you have Valve stepping in and working with anti-cheat companies to find some middleground for Linux: https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/valve-making-linux-anti-cheat-reality-for-steam-deck-launch https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/valve-making-linux-anti-c...
    - sudosysgen 5y ago
      These anticheats are being ported to Linux by valve. If it was Microsoft's anticheat working in a TPM itbwoiodht impossible. Also, Microsoft is already a DRM vendor with the Windows Store.
- greggman3 5y ago
  I can't wait for that day! Haha! Well, I'm crossing my fingers the Valve Steam Deck satisfies my PC gaming needs (probably not though). I hate Hate HATE that more and more games are wanting to install System level services. It's absolutely not acceptable for the same machine my financial info and other sensative info is on has apps digging deep into the system. I could run 2 machines but that's also a PITA, maintaining both machines and trying to decide when to use one vs the other. A gaming machine is powerful but I also need that power for video editing and other things. 2 VR rigs, one for non-gaming, one for gaming, would also suck. etc.... I want Windows to lockdown like Mac (and sure, you can turn it off?) but I'd like apps not to be able to muck with the system. Games have no excuse IMO.
mattnewton 5y ago
I think they kinda tried with the windows store + arm windows surfaces. The market didn't like it.
- LASR 5y ago
  To be fair, those Windows RT tablets were complete garbage. I was working at Microsoft when they came out and they handed them out for free to every employee. Due to the lack of any meaningful apps (not even Chrome), the thing was DOA. IE11 was the only option for browsing.

madeofpalk 5y ago

WSL I struggle to see how WSL could ever be a walled garden. THe only reason it exists is because server infra (including a bunch of Azure!) runs linux, and loads of development workflows are linux-only. The moment you add something "windows specific" to Linux you prevent it from actually being used because then you can't deploy it.

babypuncher 5y ago

I really don't see how their Android app support or WSL could realistically go from extend to extinguish. I don't think Microsoft's MO is to completely dominate your entire stack anymore. They just want to make sure they form some critical piece of it so you can't get rid of them.

jimmygrapes 5y ago
The most effective virus is not that which kills its host, but makes the host dependent upon the virus
AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
If Microsoft extends their Android implementation to provide new features before Android itself does, and these features become popular, then all Microsoft would have to do is start putting out their own "Android" phones to begin eating the market. WSL, I'll admit, will be trickier to convert. However, they have decades of experience at this so don't put it past them to figure it out.
- WorldMaker 5y ago
  Given Microsoft is using/embracing Amazon's replacements for "Google Play Services" isn't the threat here more that Amazon might finally extend Android after a decade of trying and failing? (Whether or not you agree that "Google Play Services" is already that EEE play, the incumbent, seemingly not going anywhere, and Microsoft/Amazon are playing underdog in this game.)

jodrellblank 5y ago

How does "someone can install Linux in a VM on Windows"[1] translate into "ajvs won't be able to use Linux anymore"? I don't see how you can make such a claim with a straight face. [1] WSL is based on Hyper-V virtual machines.

teddyfrozevelt 5y ago
They're already doing it with WSL specific features such as the DirectX driver. https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/directx-heart-linux/ https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/directx-heart-linux/
- jodrellblank 5y ago
  Explain how "Microsoft puts a DirectX in WSL" stops you from running Linux in future? Because it really doesn't seem like it will affect you or what you can do in any way at all.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
    1. MS adds directx to WSL 2. People write "Linux" apps that require directx 3. Linux technically stays an option but is unable to run apps without NT underneath, and nobody writes plain Linux apps because of market effects Weak because people could still write apps for just Linux, plausible because convincing people to divert effort to the MS way would work and is classic EEE.
    - anaganisk 5y ago
      No one in their right mind would right linux apps targeted to run WSL only. Even if they do, it would never capture the market of pure linux. Also any modifications done to linux should be GPLd hence i don’t think thats a problem either.
    - jodrellblank 5y ago
      Your use of "extinguish" describes a situation where you can use exactly what you have now, in exactly the way you're doing now? And the terrible thing which "extinguish" means to you is "future people who might have given me free stuff might not, and it will be Microsoft's fault"? And not only that, but the way MS will "convince people to divert effort" is by making something people want more? And that is somehow terribly unfair? From Wikipedia: > "Extinguish: When extensions become a de facto standard because of their dominant market share, they marginalize competitors that do not or cannot support the new extensions." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis... The current world is that there are programs written for Linux distributions with certain subsystems (audio, window manager, systemd, etc) which don't work on other distributions without those subsystems. People who ignore binary blob video card drivers, etc. A Microsoft Ubuntu with DirectX that only runs in WSL would be just another thing like that. It would be practically no different to "macOS is UNIX but you can't run all macOS programs on other Unixes" which hasn't extinguished Linux or Unix. Even moreso when people who want to write for DirectX can do so for Windows. Why would those people target DirectX on Linux which only runs on WSL? And if it doesn't only run on WSL, let's say DirectX on Linux works on any Ubuntu and Valve use it for Steam and gaming on Linux becomes massively popular by targetting DirectX for video ... how do you then connect to "nobody writes plain Linux apps because 3D games are an option" and from there to "and now despite being massively more popular, Linux is extinguished and this is bad because even though I can run literally any other distribution and write and run my own software and all previous software, I can no longer be bothered to and that's both bad and Microsoft's fault"?