why the fuck are linux fans so salty about this?
windows/linux user here, this is going to make my life so much better, but in online discussions everywhere all I'm seeing is "hur dur ms is really super shit, foss is the future, windows days are numbered, how dare ubuntu do this!"
>>54291748
I think it's really great they are doing this.
If Linux applications run better on Windows than Linux then we should just exclusively write Linux applications from now on.
They have autism
>>54291765
>If Linux applications run better on Windows than Linux
This will never happen because Linux is better than NT.
>>54291806
Why is it better than NT?
>>54291748
Wow! This is such bullshit!
>>54291748
It would be nice the other way around tho.
Like running Win32 on Ubuntu
>>54292003
WINE. Which is basically what this is, except at kernel-level.
>>54291765
If you ever read their overview, you would know it won't be possible.
Microsoft are writing Linux syscalls from scratch without copying Linux source code to prevent licensing disputes.
There is no way that Microsoft can implement the syscalls better in a few years. Especially seeing as they havn't even implemented half of all syscalls, so a lot of software doesn't work at all yet.
We are not. Because we don't give a shit. Because there is no reason for a linux user to ever care about what windows 10 is doing.
>>54291748
Windows has a history of embracing things making them shitty then attacking any one doing it who isnt them. Look up embrance extend extinguish.
>>54291871
NT is convuluted bullshit
>>54292065
Also even what they implement will be weakened Windows doesnt want you to have the freedom bash does.
>>54292085
no way dude
>>54291895
Because microsoft is the negative of what Free software stands for.
It's like helping satan, basically.
>>54291748
i don't think linux means what you think it means.
>>54291748
>why the fuck are linux fans so salty about this?
because it's yet another avenue for microsoft to embrace, extend, extinguish, but they won't even need to extinguish because extension implies extinguishing support
despite what /g/ babies believe, the sysadmin and back/frontend developer crowd are an extremely valuable subset of the gnu/linux server market share and they develop almost exclusively on gnu/linux and osx because the tools and libraries just aren't there for windows, so microsoft are pushing hard to get this subset to develop on windows or to develop for windows - first by open sourcing their c#/.net code so gnu/linux will finally get working c#/.net programs, and secondly by implementing a shitty emulation layer to get bash working on windows
>windows/linux user here, this is going to make my life so much better
and that's the crux of it, they're targetting people like you because people like you won't give a shit about keeping development on gnu/linux or osx and will help develop or use more shit like activedirectory so windows will be an essential part of the stack - allowing microsoft to sell more licenses to business - where they make the majority of their income
if it's written on microsoft's ubuntu/bash but doesn't make use of linux systemcalls (such as everything being a file - something microsoft CANNOT implement in the same fashion) and instead makes use of libraries that run exclusively on windows it won't matter that it's developed essentially on a gnu/linux userspace because it won't run on gnu/linux distributions
>>54292311
and for the record I actually don't give a shit that microsoft are doing this, the people that gave a shit about developing on windows were always happy to run a gnu/linux vm and they will likely continue to do so because as previous demonstrations have shown, shitty compatibility layers don't match up to even a virtual machine (cgywin, mono, wine, etc, say hi)
>>54291748
I don't use GNU/Linux because the exclusive applications. I use it because of its free nature and sensible package management and updates
>>54292056
You will start to give a shit when Windows 10 starts installing itself on your system.
I wonder how long it will be before linux distros start including automatic tools to to create a windows vm (from an install disc of course) with seamless RDP and shared file systems.
I already do that + PCI passthrough for games, but the average ubuntu user would be far out of their depth trying to do it on their own.
cross platform gnu/bash comes to wangblows.
whoop tea doo.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/ubuntu-linux-and-openstack-cloud-come-to-ibm-servers/
>>54292085
All I hear are trivial opinions rather than technical details.
>>54292374
Classic political psy-op: insist that a commonly known weakness is actually a strength - loudly enough and for long enough people start to believe it.
>>54291748
am linux fan
not salty
sucks that winbuntu bash (aka windows command line) so sucky it can't even run tmux or any interesting program but whatever
>>54291748
>windows/linux user here
So post your screenfetch
The GPL exists for a very simple reason; to undermine microsoft's monopoly. What you see here is microsoft building an empire of shit.
>>54292697
Because it's closed source.
Well.
It's used to render fonts for the classical example.
Also you could listen to the ex-empolyees that tell you it's convuluted bullshit.
>>54291748
Embrace, extend, extinguish.
Everyone who jumps in is building a monopoly.
>>54292332
Wine is a better legacy application compatibilty layer than anything windows has to offer.
>>54292846
This too.
Viral marketing does happen.
because this >>54292065
>>54292374
Your fault for using Ubuntu anyway
>>54293010
>Closed source
So in othether words it was developed by professionals, and actually works
>Some bullshit about font rendering that has nothing to do with OS archetecture
>Ex employees
Where? Who?
It's GNU on top of Windows which is a win for GNU
>>54293115
You just got trolled
>>54291748
>why the fuck are linux fans so salty about this?
Because Linux die-hards are convinced that Microsoft is some sort of evil bogeyman out to get them.
This actually used to be true. See the Halloween files.
But anyone with a modicum of understanding of the current tech climate can see that they are legitimately just trying to embrace in this instance.
Microsoft's business model is moving into Azure, and the majority of their income is licensing for enterprise products.
They only stand to gain by making their development environments play nice.
>.NET is open source
>C# is open source
>Xamarin is open source
>Canonical, Unity, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux are all joining the .NET Foundation
>Red Hat Enterprise Linux is now on Azure
>.NET is now shipping with Red Hat Enterprise Linux as a first class development language
>Ubuntu integrated into Windows
Microsoft isn't trying to put down Linux.
Microsoft has decided it can play hand-in-hand with Linux and everyone wins.
>>54291748
So Microsoft are releasing FOSS under GPL sans botnet when?
>>54293338
>GPL
Less free than MIT, which is what they are releasing a good chuck of their FOSS under.
>>54293158
>>Some bullshit about font rendering that has nothing to do with OS archetecture
The NT kernel renders fonts.
>>Ex employees
I don't have a database, but I'm sure you could find something on google.
Also, the software being closed source is why you often don't hear as much raw technical critisism towards it in comparison to anything open source. Those discussions are held behind closed doors. I suspect you misunderstood that.
Go google some ex empolyee stories.
>>54293270
>just trying to embrace in this instance
That's the first step. So far nothing is different.
Also, everyone wins only because the GPL demands that.
Exercise healthy caution.
>>54293402
>Also, everyone wins only because the GPL demands that.
They aren't using GPL for most of their FOSS.
They're using MIT and Apache.
And that's a GOOD thing.
GPL forces you to release the source if you modify it, and that's not freedom.
>>54291748
>why the fuck are linux fans so salty about this?
Because Microsoft is literally paying NOTHING forward.
Ubuntu and other distributions will NEVER run Windows binaries... yet here Microsoft is running ours.
This shit is not ok, man.
>>54291748
cleartype
>>54293433
>ours
Who the fuck do you think you are, faggot?
Canonical owns the Ubuntu trademarks, and FOSS is usable by anyone, including the big, scary corporations.
>>54293431
>GPL forces you to release the source if you modify it, and that's not freedom.
It doesn't. It forces you to provide the source if you provide binaries.
>>54293467
>FOSS is usable by anyone
It looks like FOSS does have a weakness.
Assholes using it for their own personal gain!
>>54293471
ANTI-FREEDOM
>>54293010
>Wine is a better legacy application compatibilty layer than anything windows has to offer.
I agree, however it's worth noting that microsoft's offer is obviously in early beta and not representative of a finished product
(but, I mean, honestly, wine has a far easier task of emulating windows systemcalls than windows will have with even trying to emulate everything being a file)
>>54293158
>So in othether words it was developed by professionals, and actually works
that's why they can't into server marketshare :^)
>>54293270
>are convinced that Microsoft is some sort of evil bogeyman out to get them.
leaked internal documents show that microsoft IS an evil bogeyman out to get them
>This actually used to be true. See the Halloween files.
oh, let me guess, they've changed now?
>But anyone with a modicum of understanding of the current tech climate can see that they are legitimately just trying to embrace in this instance.
right, they're trying to embrace because if they can extend functionality then suddenly businesses that rely on specific software (written in windows using ubuntu/bash) will now have to buy (more) windows licenses for their servers, and microsoft make the bulk of their income from businesses not end users
even if they don't extend, they get what they want, people that aren't developing on gnu/linux and osx and instead are developing on windows - which means more windows businesses and enterprise plans sold as it won't be just hr staff using windows
>They only stand to gain by making their development environments play nice.
and what they gain as an extension of that is more permanent windows licensing because people that weren't inclined to run windows before (lack of a proper shell and the applications that come with the gnu/linux userspace) will now run windows to develop on and will be inclined to use applications like activedirectory which are obviously windows specific
>>54293595
>leaked internal documents show that microsoft IS an evil bogeyman out to get them
Yes, I specifically mentioned them.
>oh, let me guess, they've changed now?
Yes, it's not Ballmer's Microsoft anymore.
>even if they don't extend, they get what they want, people that aren't developing on gnu/linux and osx and instead are developing on windows - which means more windows businesses and enterprise plans sold as it won't be just hr staff using windows
There is literally nothing inherently wrong with this.
Over 90% of all business use Active Directory already.
>and what they gain as an extension of that is more permanent windows licensing because people that weren't inclined to run windows before (lack of a proper shell and the applications that come with the gnu/linux userspace) will now run windows to develop on and will be inclined to use applications like activedirectory which are obviously windows specific
Again, literally nothing wrong with this.
I am going to mimic you for a moment, albeit in a silly, strawmanned way:
>HOW DARE THIS BUSINESS BENEFIT AT THE SAME TIME AS ITS USERS. THEY SHOULD GIVE ALL THEIR MONEY TO THE POOR AND NOT TRY TO MAKE MONEY.
Everyone is winning right now. No one is negatively impacted by Microsoft's current initiatives.
In addition, there is no evidence to suggest that this is a threat to anything other than Linux users' special snowflake mentality.
Faggot.
Use whatever you like, nobody gives a shit.
cont >>54293595
>>54293270
>will be inclined to use applications like activedirectory which are obviously windows specific
and obviously licensing issues will prevent windows server specific stuff being ran on employee machines - which means more windows server licenses
>Microsoft has decided it can play hand-in-hand with Linux and everyone wins.
microsoft have decided to play nice with gnu/linux because as it turns out the developers that write software for gnu/linux could do the same thing for windows and get microsoft more of a foothold in the server market
they're not porting c#/.net to linux, nor gnu/bash to windows out of the kindness of their hearts, they're doing it to get developers working on their platforms
>>54293359
>Less free than MIT
less free if you're an idiot and not developing or using the software
>>54293431
>They're using MIT and Apache.
>And that's a GOOD thing.
corporations being able to use your source without providing their contributions is a good thing, gentlemen, you heard it here first
>GPL forces you to release the source if you modify it
the gpl only requires you to release your source if you redistribute the gpl code you're using you fucking mongoloid
if you don't want to release your source then don't use gpl code, this akin to having a cake and eating it too
>>54293723
>they're not porting c#/.net to linux, nor gnu/bash to windows out of the kindness of their hearts, they're doing it to get developers working on their platforms
Again:
>HOW DARE THIS BUSINESS BENEFIT AT THE SAME TIME AS ITS USERS. THEY SHOULD GIVE ALL THEIR MONEY TO THE POOR AND NOT TRY TO MAKE MONEY.
>>54293723
Son, you're talking too much sense right now. They'd never know how to respond without calling you an autist, kek
>>54293723
>the gpl only requires you to release your source if you redistribute the gpl code you're using you fucking mongoloid
Yes, and if I modify that code to my purposes in a way that reveals company-specific data then I cannot use that software.
GPL is anti-freedom. I am not free to do whatever I want with the source code.
>>54293723
You have a naive outlook on how a for-profit business is supposed to work.
Just because Microsoft benefits here, does NOT make what they are doing wrong in any way.
Are they supposed to just run a charity?
How would you propose Microsoft continue their business going forward? Release everything and make everything cost nothing?
>>54293513
>mfw linuxtarts calling bsdfriends cucks but they're getting cucked the hardest now
>>54293683
>There is literally nothing inherently wrong with this.
there is nothing wrong with a company making their platform more attractive to develop on, however,
>Again, literally nothing wrong with this.
there is something inherently wrong with their tactics in which they accomplish this, by embracing new technologies, extending on the original feature set, and extinguishing support for the technologies they extended on; it's inherently immoral and unethical and is the primary source of the controversy regarding the leaked documents that you yourself mention
>Everyone is winning right now. No one is negatively impacted by Microsoft's current initiatives.
everyone will be winning until the crux of the matter arises; compatibility issues between applications written on gnu/linux and applications written on gnu/windows because the windows kernel design does not and cannot translate system calls well to and from the linux kernel - and at that point end users will be locked into microsoft's platform
developers can develop what they want on what they want, windows can support what they want, pretending that this issue is anything but microsoft poaching developers is missing the point and delusional at best, malicious at worse
>In addition, there is no evidence to suggest [...]
no evidence to suggest if you completely ignore the leaked documents that you yourself mentioned, but let's ignore those -- sure, no evidence to suggest if you ignore all of the compatibility issues that arise with existing compatibility layers (cgywin, wine, etc) that are solved by doing something like running the os in a virtual machine despite the issues that such a setup brings
cont again, man, how about that 2,000 character limit huh >>54293961
>>54293754
>Yes, and if I modify that code to my purposes in a way that reveals company-specific data
I know you're trying to make the point of drivers and proprietary hardware secrets, but I cannot resist,
>hardcoding company data
>GPL is anti-freedom.
again, it's only anti-freedom if you're an idiot
gpl's freedom in the case of company's secrets comes in the form of companies using gpl code by choice and opening up their "muh proprietary" secrets and providing a better service than their competitors, you're literally trying to argue the case that freedom comes from being able to close off source from users and other end developers which doesn't provide any freedom down the line - you're taking a lineage of freedom and ending it
>>54293766
>You have a naive outlook on how a for-profit business is supposed to work.
only if you put words in my mouth
>Just because Microsoft benefits here, does NOT make what they are doing wrong in any way.
benefiting from this is not the wrong doing, it's the manner in which they're doing it which historically has been the means in which they gained their reputation for being a scummy monopolistic company that as a direct result ended up in several anti-trust lawsuits
>Are they supposed to just run a charity?
>How would you propose Microsoft continue their business going forward? Release everything and make everything cost nothing?
maybe they should ask redhat for tips on how to make money while providing a free product
>>54293961
>>54294120
So your argument is literally that Microsoft *might* do bad things because of leaked documents over a decade old, some nearly two decades old. Also, let's ignore the fact that nearly all of the major decision makers in the company have changed. And let's ignore the fact that they would not benefit at all by 'extinguishing' Linux support and cross-platform capabilities. And let's ignore the fact their business model is shifting to developer cloud services, which represents a major paradigm shift in how the company interacts with other technologies.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux is not free. You must be confused.
Source code of binaries are supplied if you purchase their product, but if you use the Red Hat Enterprise Linux code without paying, you are subject to litigation. Support comes with your licensing fees, much like Windows Server. The only difference is whether the company provides the code to the purchaser.
I think your intentions are sound (a pretty idealism), but frankly you are incredibly naive and misinformed.
lold @ the kid with the wall of text
NOTHING ABOUT THIS IS BAD
IT'S A 100% UBUNTU RUNNING ON TOP OF WINDOWS
GNU WINS
>>54294240
>So your argument is literally that Microsoft *might* do bad things
it's not even that they might do bad things exclusively, I made the point several times that microsoft cannot translate systemcalls 1:1 to the linux kernel counterpart which very well can result in compatibility issues alone
>because of leaked documents over a decade old, some nearly two decades old
documents from the 90s, practices that continued well into the 2000's, company mentality that continues today
>And let's ignore the fact that they would not benefit at all by 'extinguishing' Linux support and cross-platform capabilities.
again, made the point several times that they don't have to extinguish shit, that's the point of EEE, they embrace a platform so people will be more inclined to develop on it while extending features preventing people from going back to the original platform through lack of support and then the original platform is extinguished through lack of support
(for additional context: >I think your intentions are sound (a pretty idealism), but frankly you are incredibly naive and misinformed.)
except, in this case, microsoft aren't going to extinguish linux by enabling a few web specific ruby/js libraries to be ran on windows easier
I'm not trying to make the point that by doing this microsoft are the devil incarnate and that it'll be the end of linux, merely that by extending into supporting the gnu/linux userspace (which they have every right to do) they'll be poaching developers who have wanted to develop on windows (which they have every right to do) and by extension may write libraries or programs that will only work well on gnu/windows and not gnu/linux (which they have every right to do) which as far as business practices go, is pretty shitty
cont >>54294826
>>54294240
>>54294240
>Red Hat Enterprise Linux is not free. You must be confused.
>Source code of binaries are supplied if you purchase their product, but if you use the Red Hat Enterprise Linux code without paying, you are subject to litigation.
on the contrary: http://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/linux/enterprise/
rhel has every right to only provide the source code along with the binaries (as per the terms of the gpl) but they opt instead to provide the source free for everybody, and as a result everybody can download, rebuild, and redistribute, the rhel source code, as per the terms of the gpl
the only instance where you may be subject to litigation is if you infringe on the rhel trademark which may require you change the terms "Red Hat" in the source (NOT the licenses) to something else -- this is the exact same case with mozilla and firefox, you can download, recompile and redistribute the firefox source tree but you have to respect the trademark law and may be required to change the terms mozilla and firefox -- I'm not well versed on the legalities regarding this but those vendors may have specific pages regarding it
as a result, rebuilds of rhel exist, such as centos (however centos is now part of red hat) -- completely free (as in beer) and legal
(for the record I'd say I'm being more disingenuous than misinformed but if you want a bit of both: by introducing somewhat buggy non-1:1 gnu/linux userland support, more naive developers may be inclined to develop on windows under the impression that gnu/linux is buggy and doesn't just work as well as windows, hah)
>>54291748
It has begun, i have foreseen 'dis.
Bloat eats bloat and shits Bloat blob named Blob Bloat.
>>54291748
Because of the sudden increase of constant ubuntu shilling
>>54295238
That's a lot of words bro, but I don't think anyone that matters in Microsoft or Red Hat give a shit :^)
