Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Joins the Linux Foundation (techcrunch.com)

Posted by msmash on from the boom dept.

Microsoft today said it is joining the Linux Foundation as a high-paying Platinum member. Linux Foundation executive director Jim Zemlin said, "This may come as a surprise to you, but they were not big fans," describing the two's previous relationship. From a report on TechCrunch: The new Microsoft under CEO Satya Nadella, however, is singing a very different tune. Today's Microsoft is one of the biggest open source contributors around. Over the course of just the last few years, it has essentially built Canonical's Ubuntu distribution into Windows 10, brought SQL Server to Linux, open-sourced core parts of its .NET platform and partnered with Red Hat, SUSE and others. As Zemlin noted, Microsoft has also contributed to a number of Linux Foundation-managed projects like Node.js, OpenDaylight, the Open Container Initiative, the R Consortium and the Open API Initiative.ArsTechnica has more details.

202 comments

  1. The mothership is here! by CajunArson · · Score: 1

    Drink the koolaid and ascend to the mothership!

    --
    AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
    1. Re:The mothership is here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nah, this is just the 'Embrace' phase of EEE that Microsoft is so well known for.

    2. Re:The mothership is here! by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Nah, this is just the 'Embrace' phase of EEE that Microsoft is so well known for.

      The 'Embrace' phase is pretty much the only one they are known for, people said it about Java, they said it about HTML standards, they said it about Linux kernel contributions, they said it about Open Source and now of course they're saying it about the Linux foundation so by all accounts "EEE" means "will become hugely successful".

    3. Re: The mothership is here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People did not say that about html. Microsoft was in it's infancy, and reacted no different than to mobile market emerging. People did say that about hundred of smaller companies stat ceased to exist. RIP BeOS.

    4. Re: The mothership is here! by exomondo · · Score: 1

      People did not say that about html.

      Really? That proprietary extensions to HTML weren't an example of what people believed EEE was?

  2. WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Could they maybe see their way to helping out the WINE project?

    Until that happens, I'm not really going to congratulate them.

    AC

    1. Re:WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That would't make business sense. I think this move is a strategically great move of Microsoft. The operating system wars are always about available features and apps, so when they go into this, they want more of the programs that people use to be available on their operating system. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point the Windows Phone gets a Dalvik engine to run Android apps. When they have re-claimed some of the lost userbase they are probably going to focus on making the Windows Store an essential gateway. If that is going to go well is anyones guess.

      They are not doing this to help competitors, but as streaming services move to crossplatform tech they are down to "games" as the only important feature again. So they need to do something :)

    2. Re:WINE by kenh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Could they maybe see their way to helping out the WINE project?

      Why would they do that? They now fully-support a standalone Ubuntu (Linux) installation under Windows as either an integrated part of Windows, or a fully-supported guest OS under their hypervisor, either running on current desktop or server installations or as a guest on their free Windows Server 2016 Hyper-V Server offering.

      Until that happens, I'm not really going to congratulate them.

      So until Microsoft assists a competitor to take market share from them you won't support them - is there ANY other company you can think of that gives up market share to help a competitor?

      --
      Ken
    3. Re: WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were going to do that and they nixed it. They are only doing it for ios apps. And the ability to easily cross compile for Windows and ios.

    4. Re: WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Who cares? Fuck Microsoft. Until they bend over backwards for the consumer, they can suck a fat chode.

    5. Re:WINE by Tough+Love · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Do you even think Microsoft is even able to help? By example, the current situation with SMB is, when Microsoft needs to know something particularly subtle about SMB, they go ask the Samba guys. See, Microsoft never cares much about clean and transparent design, or keeping accurate historical records. Whatever they happen to cobble together by RC date is the definition of the "standard". If undocumented or partially documented APIs shifted a little, so what? You can see how this design culture might create issues with trying to run random Windows binaries from any point in that 20 year reign of chaos. To sort all that out requires real dedication to the art of fecal archaeology. Not something you're going to find a lot of in Microsoft's backbiting engineering culture, and if it does exist, it will be managed out soon.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    6. Re:WINE by HiThere · · Score: 2

      I think you misunderstand the "Linux Foundation". Judging from their past actions that's not a group that supports Linux as much as a group that supports businesses that are somehow involved with Linux. It's not exactly a false name, but it's certainly a misleading one...and probably on purpose.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    7. Re:WINE by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's a group that controls access to people who are able to push code into the mainline kernel. If you don't pay your dues, then your patches probably won't be reviewed / upstreamed, and no one will take any care to avoid making KPI / KBI changes that completely break your work.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    8. Re: WINE by BellyJelly · · Score: 1

      And ReactOS!

    9. Re:WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Off the top of my head:
      IBM -> WebSphere/MQ/Connect Direct all work on Windows, AIX, MainFrame, Linux
      Oracle -> DB/Java/mysql/virtualbox/Weblogic all multiplatform, and Oracle owns Solaris
      Microsoft -> SQL Server is now (or soon to be) available for Linux, VisualStudio is Free and some editions are Open Source
      Redhat -> CentOS, Oracle (Unbreakable Linux)
      All of these involve giving up market share of some other product to support multiple platforms

      Improving Wine support could actually end up benefiting Microsoft since it would allow more use of the paid Visual Studio/TFS/SQL Server offerings for cross platform development work.

    10. Re:WINE by myrdos2 · · Score: 4, Funny

      is there ANY other company you can think of that gives up market share to help a competitor?

      And I suppose you have some other explanation for Windows 8 and 10?

    11. Re:WINE by MSG · · Score: 1

      is there ANY other company you can think of that gives up market share to help a competitor?

      "They now fully-support a standalone Ubuntu (Linux) installation under Windows as either an integrated part of Windows, or a fully-supported guest OS under their hypervisor,"

      So... Canonical, then?

    12. Re:WINE by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Why would they do that because they are trying to force Windows ANAL PROBE 10 on every one and they are coming off as lame arse perverts and nobody wants their consumer products any more, so empty fucking marketing. M$ is being the consumer market touch of death , just ewww. Perhaps they can sell more smart phones if they shape them like round long and not to wide and increased vibration levels. Nobody likes fucking perves http://onlineslangdictionary.c... and that is exactly who M$ have become. So take the money and tell them to STFU.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    13. Re:WINE by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      PS The Linux Foundation should incorporate in their bylaws the requirement that members must respect the privacy of end users, otherwise that money is to tainted to be of use.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    14. Re:WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I suppose you have some other explanation for Windows 8 and 10?

      you can mock Windows 8 and 10 (and ME and Vista) all you want but in the end many many more people used those than desktop linux. as far as a desktop OS to do what the user wants (you know, running the programs they want to run) Windows is far better than any Linux distro. the fact that Linux faboys will still argue about that is the very proof that they are completely out of touch with what users want and why, relatively speaking, nobody uses Linux despite the hundreds of distributions that have been flung at the wall to see if one of them will stick.

    15. Re:WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would they do that because they are trying to force Windows ANAL PROBE 10 on every one and they are coming off as lame arse perverts and nobody wants their consumer products any more

      and this is why desktop linux continues to fail, people like you can't see the real world through the red mist. you're fucking useless and pointless distraction but you don't even know it, just go away and take your anal probe fixation with you.

    16. Re:WINE by jon3k · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That would't make business sense. I think this move is a strategically great move of Microsoft.

      The price of operating systems is steadily approaching zero. macOS updates are free and the OS comes with the hardware. ChromeOS is free. Microsoft already provides the license for free for smaller devices. PC sales are slowing and that's what moves OS licenses. People have fewer reasons to upgrade. What Microsoft realized is that hardware and services are the future, not operating system licenses. And to capitalize on that, they need their software to run everywhere. That means Visual Studio for Mac and SQL Server for Linux.

      So no, I really don't believe helping the WINE project is a bad move for Microsoft at this point. Anything that increases adoption of Microsoft software and services is what matters now.

    17. Re:WINE by dbIII · · Score: 1

      That would actually be of benefit since WINE on MS Windows would solve a few compatibility problems.
      I have an MS Windows 7 user who log onto a linux box via X-Windows (Xwin32) to run an old version ofAutoCAD via WINE. The old version will not start on anything newer than MS Windows XP. He doesn't like the newer interface, so that looks like a trivial reason, but there is plenty of legacy software out there that currently needs a virtual machine to run but could run with much more effectively just the right library replacement as WINE does.

    18. Re: WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux Workstations continue to operate regardless of technological and legal hurdles thrown at it from competition. They are just peachy. What you are talking about is OEM commercial success, which is largely irrelevant. Why would anyone even want Linux to become a dominant OEM offering? Why sacrefice reliability, security, and privacy for it? It serves well as an alternative in the market just right.

    19. Re:WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AC from parent post, here.

      I agree on your opinion that the income is not going to be from OS licenses, but from "services". The biggest chance of coming out as a winner though, is through a Gateway store and not as a simple service provider.

    20. Re:WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a bit dishonest. Ask a user what they want and they'll say "Internet, [specific game title here], e-mail, and Office". What they think of as the "Internet" is in fact usually Chrome or IE. Not too bad; Chrome runs on the big three these days. Almost any game they name generally means games built solely for Windows, using DirectX. Usually shit like Call of Duty, GTA, Counter-Strike, Elder Scrolls, and so on, from studios that don't give a fuck about other OSes. E-mail is usually Gmail or Outlook. And then there's the gorilla in the room, Office. People have been trained, since elementary school, that Office is _the_ standard, not to accept anything else. Employers look for Office experience instead of other skills that may be more relevant in such a setting.

      In short, people want what they've been told they want: Windows things. It's obvious that no other OS -- be it GNU/Linux, OS X, Haiku, whatever -- can meet those expectations, because they're *not Windows*. So it's no surprise that people who grew up on Windows want Windows things. Duh

      Those are users I don't want using GNU/Linux to begin with, as they have an entitlement complex and have no interest in learning. They turn their brains off in front of a computer. They're so used to being treated like a customer that it's a huge culture-shock when they have a problem and someone tells them to reread a manpage because they fucked up. They rail against things like, "I shouldn't have to choose my network manager", or "I don't want a terminal, I want a GUI with all the options!" Then when they get a GUI with options, like the kernel's menuconfig or some of the ridiculous settings applications like NetworkManager or GNOME Settings, they lose their shit because now it's *too* complex. Simplify it, and they complain about something missing. In short, they are unpleasable. A good number of people in libre software don't mind a little setup to tweak their system into something usable for them, but it does require some humility and willingness to learn. People often don't do that because they forget that they had to learn Windows, too.

      Lastly, the number of people that use a thing grants no accolade of quality on it whatsoever. When you then consider all the moves that have been made to effectively force Windows -- and ONLY Windows -- onto OEM machines, it explains the behavior we observed in my first paragraph.

    21. Re:WINE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ask a user what they want and they'll say "Internet, [specific game title here], e-mail, and Office".

      No. Those are the tasks common to the average user.

      In short, people want what they've been told they want: Windows things. It's obvious that no other OS -- be it GNU/Linux, OS X, Haiku, whatever -- can meet those expectations, because they're *not Windows*. So it's no surprise that people who grew up on Windows want Windows things.

      No. The reason people use Windows is because it actually runs their applications (which is the primary purpose of an operating system, an OS that cannot run the user's applications is worthless) and the alternatives offer no significant value.

      Those are users I don't want using GNU/Linux to begin with, as they have an entitlement complex and have no interest in learning.

      That is an absolute bullshit elitist mentality. You are the one telling me the users' needs are simple yet you are the one who can't understand that a system that serves those needs doesn't need to be complex. People like you *still* cannot understand why Linux fails on the desktop and *still* blame the user.

      They turn their brains off in front of a computer.

      No. They just want things to work, it's a tool to do a job and users get frustrated when that tool is constanty breaking down. You blame the user for basic expectations of functionality. Android doesn't suffer these problems and it is a Linux-based system that if anything is more complex due to its networking and power requirements.

      They rail against things like, "I shouldn't have to choose my network manager", or "I don't want a terminal, I want a GUI with all the options!" Then when they get a GUI with options, like the kernel's menuconfig or some of the ridiculous settings applications like NetworkManager or GNOME Settings, they lose their shit because now it's *too* complex. Simplify it, and they complain about something missing. In short, they are unpleasable.

      Rubbish, this is precisly why well-designed operating systems like OSX succeed and why of the hundreds of attempts at Linux distributions combined fail in comparison. You can't get it right so you just blame the user instead.

      Lastly, the number of people that use a thing grants no accolade of quality on it whatsoever.

      But also by the same token when you can't even *give* something away you should realize there is something wrong.

      When you then consider all the moves that have been made to effectively force Windows -- and ONLY Windows -- onto OEM machines, it explains the behavior we observed in my first paragraph.

      Wake up. Dell offer it across their line of laptops, HP and Lenovo have both offerred it and even Best Buy was trying to sell them in their stores. But NOBODY wanted it because it offers no value to end users over Windows and it is actually *worse* as an OS for most users because it runs *less* applications.

      The real problem is that the desktop Linux community has spent so long defending Linux that they have no idea how to take criticism and have spent no time listening to the users. There is nothing technically wrong with it, it's brilliant but the user experience on the desktop has always been a dismal failure. It's fantastic in server and embedded where that doesn't matter, it's been wildly successful on mobile thanks to Google's efforts to create a good user experience and both Apple and Microsoft have succeeded in creating good user experiences on the desktop where the Linux community has failed ... and your only move is to blame the user.

  3. Beware Troy-gens bearing gifts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Beware Troy-gens bearing gifts.
    Trust is required, were non exists.

  4. Welp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There goes the neighborhood!

    1. Re:Welp by alvinrod · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's not that surprising. As Microsoft moves towards being a service company, they care less and less about keeping their own source closed or sabotaging open source projects. You can use Azure to run Linux just as easily as Windows. Why should Microsoft care, they get paid anyhow.

      I doubt they'll ever open source their core product like Office, but if open sourcing their tools or contributing to open source projects makes it easier for people to use Microsoft services, that's money for Microsoft that isn't going to someone else.

      They'll never be as open source friendly as some would like, but at least they're a lot less hostile. Since they got rid of Ballmer who was the obstinate type that kept trying pound square pegs into circle holes, they've been a lot more willing to accept that not every single part of a solution needs to be something from Microsoft.

    2. Re: Welp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And meanwhile they push things like Secure Boot that make it increasingly difficult to boot Linux on standard consumer PCs, removing caveats in the original spec requiring it to be possible to turn it off, and are positioned as the gatekeeper for keys needed to boot (and charging for them). I I don't know about anyone else, but I would consider that pretty darn hostile.

    3. Re: Welp by Megol · · Score: 1

      The secure boot spec is revised as computer manufacturers want to be able to remove the option - as it reduces support costs.

      You don't have to like it (I sure don't) but not understanding an issue before complaining is foolish...

    4. Re: Welp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Original poster here (believe it or not), I fully understand it, but I also know that the old Windows 8 spec required computer manufacturers to have an option to turn it off.

      Microsoft removed this spec, putting control over the computers well into their hands, directly or indirectly. Even though some Linux distros can run on Secure Boot, this still screws you over if you want to put together your own, and probably doesn't do you any favors even on "approved" distributions if you want to compile your own kernel. Lowered support costs or not for the manufacturers, this is still an anti-Linux move, as well as anti-alternate OS. Perhaps this is a wise business decision on their part in order to please the mass manufacturers, but it does not cast any doubt on those who are saying "embrace, extend, extinguish," as is their typical strategy. If anything, it provides some credence to it - it lets them put great pressure on any Linux distro that gets the keys, and also helps encourage people to "bypass" this hurdle by using the Ubuntu packed into Windows 10.

    5. Re: Welp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And meanwhile they push things like Secure Boot that make it increasingly difficult to boot Linux on standard consumer PCs, removing caveats in the original spec requiring it to be possible to turn it off, and are positioned as the gatekeeper for keys needed to boot (and charging for them). I I don't know about anyone else, but I would consider that pretty darn hostile.

      oh yes, not forcing OEMs to do something is so hostile. it is completely up to the OEMs what they do and the reason those OEMs dont invest in linux is because it has been proven time and time again that NOBODY WANTS IT.

      it has been offerred for free download, it has been offerred as a non-installed Live CD/USB, it has been offerred pre-installed on PCs and laptops from the biggest OEMs and it has even been offerred pre-installed on systems available off the shelf in big chain stores like Best Buy and still nobody wanted it. The message simply does not get any clearer than it already is: Linux is for mobile, embedded and server ... nobody wants it on the desktop.

      but still you will work some mental gymnastics to convince yourself that users do want it and there is a big conspiracy by corporate interests to prevent desktop users from having it. oh and these coporate interests are totally ok with it dominating in server, embedded and mobile though.

    6. Re: Welp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even though some Linux distros can run on Secure Boot, this still screws you over if you want to put together your own, and probably doesn't do you any favors even on "approved" distributions if you want to compile your own kernel. Lowered support costs or not for the manufacturers, this is still an anti-Linux move, as well as anti-alternate OS.

      And what you describe is an extremely niche market well-served by niche providers, but frankly even big players like Dell offer Linux pre-installed on systems and you can turn secure boot off on their systems, hell even Microsoft's own surface line you can turn secure boot off. You're spoiled for choice and complaining about an imagined scenario that provably isnt happening at all. If manufacturers dont offer it and were only doing it because Microsoft forced them to give you the ability to turn it off then dont support them, support one of the many many others instead.

    7. Re: Welp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Historically, closing of the garden happened progressively. Therevis no reason to believe that this timw is different. What distinguishes x86 architecture from most of competition is its opennes and documentation. There is only few ways to fence this garden off, and secure boot is one of them.

  5. One phrase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Systemd dotnet, with an integrated personal digital assistant

    1. Re:One phrase by ausekilis · · Score: 2

      Choose a personality:

      Clippy
      Cortana

    2. Re:One phrase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I choose Dr. Sbaitso.

    3. Re:One phrase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bob

  6. Embrace Phase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Don't worry, it is just the embrace phase of their plan.

    1. Re:Embrace Phase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yep, the year of the Linux desktop is near - the last year. Muahahahaha...

    2. Re:Embrace Phase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if they wanted to, they can't extinguish due to the nature of open source and GPL-style licensing.

    3. Re:Embrace Phase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yep:
      1) Add incompatible extensions.
      2) Don't document the standard ways of doing things, just their way.
      3) Noobs who don't know any better write a lot of code that only works on Microsoft Ubuntu.
      4) Companies that think they're using a common standard end up as chained to Microsoft's Linux as they were to Microsoft's web browser IE6.

      At step 1 they can also rely on their typical bugs to introduce incompatibilities. It's amazing how they've always been able to weaponize their incompetence.

    4. Re:Embrace Phase by denis-The-menace · · Score: 1

      I predicted something like this 10+ years ago in a /. post.

      --
      Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
    5. Re:Embrace Phase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love me some correct-premonitioning. Got a link to the comment?

  7. This makes sense by FictionPimp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I keep saying it, MS wants out of the OS business. They want to build 'cloud' and charge you by the minute. Developing server/desktop OS is not the business they want to be in.

    1. Re:This makes sense by subanark · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Kind of. They just don't think it will remain profitable in the long term. And they really don't want to end up like oracle, which just sits on its IP and racks in as much profit it can.

    2. Re:This makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, right. They're so indifferent to the desktop OS that they're building their own hardware for it.

    3. Re:This makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're mistaken about them wanting completely out of the OS business. Perhaps what they want is for all those people who were still insisting on Win7 Pro for new equipment to have some place interesting to go, so there would no longer be a smart vocal minority bitching about Win10. I feel confident that they still want to be making new versions of Win10 for all those people who see a closed ecosystem as an annoyance, but not a real problem. If MS created a closed source WINE competitor that allowed them to do 5% of the OS development but collect 100% of the license fees from OEMs and 0% of the heat for security failures, that might be attractive to them also. They could also collect money from makers of LTS distros for a virtual "Certified by Microsoft" sticker that reassures those users thinking about buying the MS Compatibility Module that their latest subscription to Photoshop will then run fine there (GPU acceleration may not be supported for some configurations).

    4. Re:This makes sense by speedplane · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They want to build 'cloud' and charge you by the minute.

      I have several friends at Microsoft who say the motto of the company is cloud cloud cloud. I've also spoken to people in the finance industry (e.g., big banks) who are much more receptive to putting their products on Microsoft rather than Google or AWS. Microsoft has a good shot here to take the market. They'll need a solid handle on linux servers to do that.

      --
      Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
    5. Re:This makes sense by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      Ah yes vaporware...

    6. Re:This makes sense by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      Their bread and butter is the Server market not the desktop market. The make huge profits from the server side.

    7. Re:This makes sense by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      I have several friends at Microsoft who say the motto of the company is cloud cloud cloud. I've also spoken to people in the finance industry (e.g., big banks) who are much more receptive to putting their products on Microsoft rather than Google or AWS.

      Only a big bank with locked in income streams could survive that. For any competitive player, it would be certain death. No shortage of examples to illustrate. There were at one time a few high volume financial transaction platforms running on Windows. After a string of embarrassing and costly failures, they're gone.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    8. Re:This makes sense by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, Microsoft is also spending in excess of a billion dollars per quarter on capital expenditures. Think about that for a second: What kind of software company spends that much on capex? No kind, that's who. But a cloud company that's building out data centers to compete with AWS just might.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    9. Re:This makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What part of "They'll need a solid handle on linux servers to do that" was tough for you to parse?

    10. Re:This makes sense by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      What part of "Microsoft has permanently burned their reputation with big banks to a crip" is tough for you to parse?

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    11. Re:This makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've got four words for you:
      CLOUD!
      CLOUD!
      CLOUD!
      CLOUD!

    12. Re: This makes sense by javavirtualmachine · · Score: 1

      I hope Google, Apple and Adobe beat the daylights out of Team Redmond OS should be free.

    13. Re:This makes sense by speedplane · · Score: 1

      What part of "Microsoft has permanently burned their reputation with big banks to a crip" is tough for you to parse?

      These big banks still rely heavily on Microsoft for office productivity (Windows, Office, Exchange Server). They have relationships that go back decades. Sure, maybe the traditional MS server stack did not pan out, but I don't think they've totally "burned their reputation." AWS and Google are starting from scratch with these companies, MS already has their foot in the door.

      --
      Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
    14. Re:This makes sense by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Sure, maybe the traditional MS server stack did not pan out, but I don't think they've totally "burned their reputation."

      Toasted it. Fried it. Up in smoke. That parrot is dead... burned to a crisp, whatever you think.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  8. It's a trap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Time to switch to a BSD?

  9. So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft is already a major OpenBSD sponsor. Maybe they're just recruiting the few surviving not entirely bad Linux developers for a better world.

  10. Caution, but optimism by sg_oneill · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Theres good reason to be cautious, Microsoft doesnt exactly have a spotless record of playing nice with FOSS, but recent behavior , that is microsoft realising it can still make silly money selling Azure and various microsoft software packages to the linux world means that so far its been a pretty good citizen.

    Now, I wonder if they'll eventually give us Office for linux. That'd make a LOT of suits happy.

    --
    Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    1. Re:Caution, but optimism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Got a web browser? Then you gots Office.

    2. Re:Caution, but optimism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering Office for Android we technically have Office running on Linux, at least the Linux kernel.

    3. Re:Caution, but optimism by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      I think they want to own Linux outright, and this is one more step in that plan. I also think they want to be the ONLY OS in the free world, and this is one step in that plan. Once the eliminate Linux as a competitor, they'll target Apple.

    4. Re:Caution, but optimism by D00MSlayer · · Score: 1

      They may want to, but it won't happen. Regulators in the US and the EU would stop them in their tracks (or at least we'd expect them to).

    5. Re:Caution, but optimism by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 3, Insightful

      By heavily funding it they can de-facto own it. They can also use that as leverage to guide it's development to do things like include their so-called 'telemetry' spyware and other malware, under the guise of 'improving the user experience' or 'improving user security', and only people with the chops to manually remove it and recompile it would be free of it -- or they might so firmly embed it all into the kernel that you'd have to rewrite it completely to get rid of it. Then also isn't there the problem of 'secure boot' and signing of bootloaders, and who exactly controls all that?

    6. Re:Caution, but optimism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they want to own Linux outright, and this is one more step in that plan. I also think they want to be the ONLY OS in the free world, and this is one step in that plan. Once the eliminate Linux as a competitor, they'll target Apple.

      In order to do so [world domination] they should stick to the old way: divide to conquer. But the news says they are *uniting*, so, I'd like to hear more your 'unite to conquer' strategy.

    7. Re:Caution, but optimism by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Simple: infiltrate, then subvert. It's more of a 'cold-war' strategy than a 'hot war' strategy. If they get Microsoft employees working on Linux to the point where they're a large fraction or majority, then Microsoft de-facto 'owns' it and do what they want with it. Also, by investing heavily in financial 'support' of the Linux Foundation, they can use that as leverage to make things go their way in the meantime. You THINK it's all unassailable, but it all ends up coming down to money and power; you have the money, you can influence things, and if you have enough people in key positions, you have the power. That's where I think they're going with this.

    8. Re:Caution, but optimism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Regulation bought by megacorporations will do that?

    9. Re:Caution, but optimism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It appears you also need to create an account before you can use it. But I can't be really sure, as the website explaining the details (office.com) constantly switches to Dutch, probably based on the IP address I'm currently on, even with a browser explicitly configured to tell the server it prefers English.

    10. Re:Caution, but optimism by bondsbw · · Score: 1

      Not really. Unless they figure out a way to own https://github.com/torvalds/linux, or to convert most people and companies to using Microsoft's fork of Linux (the existence of which is still just speculation on your part), then it will remain as it is.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    11. Re:Caution, but optimism by D00MSlayer · · Score: 1

      Just because they fund the foundation wouldn't mean they would own it. That's now how the Linux Foundation works. There are 8 other Platinum members, and there's also a 16-member board of directors. There would be heavy resistance by the other Linux Foundation members and the overall Linux community if MS tried any of those tricks. The majority of them I imagine are already anti-MS, so anything that MS tried to do in order to negatively affect or influence Linux would be outright opposed and rejected.

      My guess is that Satya came in with a more open-source-friendly background and is embracing it, seeing as the trends have been showing more support and acceptance for open-source products, especially in the commercial/enterprise field.

    12. Re: Caution, but optimism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I looked into it, there's a surprising number of features missing from their Web version. It also doesn't work for anyone in a secure (ie: not Internet) environment.

    13. Re:Caution, but optimism by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Who said anything about a fork? They'd just guide the development of existing forks into the direction they want it to go.

    14. Re:Caution, but optimism by dbIII · · Score: 1

      The massive missed opportunity was that Xenix, owned by Microsoft was actually a very decent unix implementation on cheap PCs and had far more of a chance to take the world by storm than something put together in spare time by a Scandinavian student. The thing with chances is that if you don't take them nothing happens.
      Every now and then when MS Windows does something utterly stupid I wonder what would happen if MS had built on that instead of a cut down CP/M clone and a gutted pale shadow of VMS.

    15. Re:Caution, but optimism by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Like the regulators stopped them with Nokia?

    16. Re:Caution, but optimism by dbIII · · Score: 2

      By heavily funding it they can de-facto own it.

      True.
      See RedHat and systemD for an example.
      RedHat funds so much work connected to it that it is far too much work for anyone trying to do something that competes with it.

    17. Re: Caution, but optimism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha. You are only fooling yourself if you think a Microsoft takeover of Linux would not result in at least one major fork.

    18. Re:Caution, but optimism by D00MSlayer · · Score: 1

      Care to elaborate?

    19. Re:Caution, but optimism by dbIII · · Score: 1

      The regulators didn't react to Microsoft's obvious takeover, deliberate share price crash and then purchase so why would they act in this case? Neither is what they see as their problem to deal with. They have a narrow range of actions they are allowed to stop and this doesn't match. They don't and can't act just because they see something is wrong, it has to be specific actions.

    20. Re:Caution, but optimism by D00MSlayer · · Score: 1

      The undoing of Nokia's mobile division was their own fault. They should have never partnered with MS in the first place, and it's not like MS was twisting their arm to do the deal. They took a gamble with Windows Phone OS instead of continuing with their own MeeGo mobile OS and it didn't pay off, so their shares plummeted due to lack of interest from operators which led to a lack of sales. Nothing was deliberate, Windows Phone OS just sucked and nobody wanted to use it, but still, in a way it was MS's fault because of a bad OS.

      Also, MS bought Nokia's mobile division and not the entire company, which is why regulators probably didn't care. MS essentially bought the rotting arm of Nokia to salvage what was still there (patents, developers, R&D, etc.).

      Now if Nokia had a large market share and MS tried to take them over, then I think regulators would have looked closer, but Nokia wasn't a big player anymore in the mobile phone market, and they shot themselves in the foot by adopting Windows Mobile OS right after developing their own mobile OS platform and then abandoning it.

    21. Re:Caution, but optimism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If by "their own" you mean the board that was complicit in the takeover, asset dump to crash the share price and subsequent fire sale - then yes.
      If you mean the shareholders and the people actually working at Nokia, then no.
      Regulators are supposed to keep an eye out for such things when a board allows such an obvious deliberate share price crash and sale.

    22. Re:Caution, but optimism by dbIII · · Score: 1

      By "their own" you mean Stephen Elop? He worked for Microsoft, before, after and it very much appears during the deliberate destruction of Nokia. Now he's busy at Australia's Telstra getting them to get rid of as much IBM or other vendor stuff they have and turn to Microsoft instead. Apparently he's on Telstra's payroll but it still working in the interests of Microsoft.

  11. DON'T LET THEM! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a Trojan!

    1. Re:DON'T LET THEM! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it was a Sultan. But it is good that MS will gain some Durex in the marketplace. Thank Satya for creating the new Lifestyle for MS!

  12. I'm sensing a pattern here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Anyone reminded of IBM?

  13. This does not look like a good thing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is Microsoft still engaged in multiple lawsuits over patent issues in Linux? Letting Microsoft into the foundation is like inviting an active felon into your home.

    1. Re:This does not look like a good thing. by LVSlushdat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Call me paranoid, but I'd NEVER allow ANY MS software on any Linux machine *I* control. Just like using Windows 10, you can't audit who/what the OS is talking to, and what its sending to the "mothership".. In the case of MS porting Office to Linux, I would have the same concerns. For all we know, they'd put the "spyware" aspects of Windows 10 into Office for Linux so they could collect everything from Linux users also. To put it bluntly, I trust MS as far as I can throw them, which, being 66 years old, isn't *very* far.. I used/supported MS products for close to 20 years as a sysadmin, but decided I was done when I retired in 2010. Now its 100% Linux on my personal systems..

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    2. Re:This does not look like a good thing. by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Call me paranoid, but I'd NEVER allow ANY MS software on any Linux machine *I* control. Just like using Windows 10, you can't audit who/what the OS is talking to, and what its sending to the "mothership"

      No, but I'd be much less concerned about an app... you can run it with any kind of restricted user or SELinux policy, firewall it, run all sorts of process and network monitoring and so on... sure you can't control the code but you can isolate the potential harm pretty well. You can't do much about Windows 10 though, it 0wns you.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  14. for those keeping score. by nimbius · · Score: 0

    1. This is the embrace phase. begin screaming into your keyboards now.
    2. Newly deceased members of Hell will find new ice-skates and ski shoes waiting for them.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  15. Step 1 by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Embrace

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re: Step 1 by TuringTest · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Years ago, this headline would be published on April 1st, and we would have had a good laugh. The times, they have a-changed.

      --
      Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
    2. Re:Step 1 by chispito · · Score: 1

      How do you extinguish FOSS? It just gets forked.

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    3. Re:Step 1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Patents? Bundling binary, proprietary blobs? Merge it into SystemD?

    4. Re:Step 1 by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Embrace

      Do you honestly think Nadella or the current Microsoft management have the strategic vision, forethought or intelligence to pull off the embrace extend extinguish plan?

      This isn't EEE, this is just MS not having a clue anymore.

    5. Re:Step 1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great in theory. In practice, when the "Prominent North American Enterprise Linux vendor"" is of critical size it becomes impractical to keep up with security & bug fixes, especially when they obfuscate the source they release.

    6. Re: Step 1 by fph+il+quozientatore · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "If Microsoft ever does applications for Linux it means I've won. " -- Linus Torvalds, in 1998.

      --
      My first program:

      Hell Segmentation fault

  16. Just another round of ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Embrace, extend and extinguish

  17. LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Microsoft never opened sourced the parts of .NET that would help most end users like WPF. Much of Microsofts open sourcing is of things that are already open source in the Linux ecosystem, and would not result in damage Microsofts products. Linux is dominate on servers, so Microsoft open sources server code, but does not open source desktop code where Microsoft is still dominate. The Ubuntu Windows thing is designed to hurt Linux by giving people a reason to not run Linux, instead allowing them to avoid Linux and run Linux apps on Windows, this will weaken the Linux user base and the Linux kernel. Another shrewd move by MS, and it also shows how stupid Ubuntu must be for participating in this and what a bunch of incompetent suckers Ubuntu is. If Ubuntu were really competent they would have done the reverse which is to have Windows apps run on Linux which would have been an advantage for Ubuntu.

    Microsoft considering its conniving should not be allowed to join Linux Foundation. The Linux foundation charter should be amended to ban companies like MS who sell competing OSs.

    1. Re:LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by kenh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If Ubuntu were really competent they would have done the reverse which is to have Windows apps run on Linux which would have been an advantage for Ubuntu.

      You understand Ubuntu GIVES AWAY their operating system, and by Microsoft including Ubuntu inside Windows desktop environments, it allows hundreds of millions of users try Ubuntu without having to wipe their disk, re-partition it, install a hypervisor (parallels, VM Ware, VirtualBox, etc.) - an obvious good thing for the Ubuntu ecosystem. It also, in the eyes of millions of users validates Linux as a usable operating system.

      Running Windows applications under Linux has been done, it's called WINE, and it's kludgy and not very intuitive for casual computer users.

      The Linux foundation charter should be amended to ban companies like MS who sell competing OSs.

      So let's see, aside from Microsoft, that would also prevent Oracle (they sell Solaris, a Linux competitor), IBM (they sell AIX, a competitor to Linux), and many other large corporations from donating to the Linux Foundation - how exactly does preventing large donors from donating "help" the Linux Foundation?

      --
      Ken
    2. Re:LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It validates a subset of one variant of the Linux ecosystem (sans the kernel, which is Linux itself) as a Windows application without independent boot capabilities or acting as an alternative to Windows. It also simultaneously gives some managers who don't know what they're talking about a reason to switch to Windows 10 because "it's got that Linux-y stuff, too!," which furthers the conversion of Ubuntu from operating system to subservient application. I am not seeing this as precisely a shining victory for Linux, especially since the core of Linux is not even there in the first place, or Ubuntu.

      Frankly it seems like they're just pushing their way steadily down the path of making it a Ubuntu-flavored wrapper for Windows functions that can compile Linux command line programs and daemons for use under Windows.

    3. Re:LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would they open-source WPF? That's pointless. Think about what it is. It's just a UI templating engine. Linux already has tons of these. And on top of that, WPF specifically targets the Win32 UI widgets, making it utterly useless on any other OS.

      They'd be stupid for open-sourcing it because it isn't useful beyond what's already done.

      You're stupid for griping about it because it's pointless. Your goal, from what I can tell, is to be able to run Windows software on Linux. That's never going to happen, and not just for business reasons. Software written for Windows has to, at some level, use the Win32 API. Win32 is a "well-designed clusterfuck" of an API. Parts of it seem stupid (usually due to backward compatibility), while other parts of it are quite nice. And not a damned thing in it is directly analogous to anything Linux has. And it sits on top of the NT kernel, which is similarly obtuse.

      The entire point of .Net is to divorce the application layer of Windows software from the Win32 API. But the in-between layers that accomplish that, like WPF, are swimming in sewerage of Win32-based implementation details. Meanwhile, XAML, the set of XML schemas that WPF uses to abstract away its dirty work, are wide open and available for anyone to implement a GUI toolkit from. Want WPF for Linux? Write something that uses XAML to generate a Gnome/KDE/X/whatever GUI for .Net.

    4. Re: LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by buchanmilne · · Score: 1

      "by Microsoft including Ubuntu inside Windows desktop environments, it allows hundreds of millions of users try Ubuntu without having to wipe their disk, re-partition it, install a hypervisor (parallels, VM Ware, VirtualBox, etc.)"

      Doesn't Windows 10 include HyperV? It should have been easier to ship HyperV enabled by default on capable hardware, and it would have been trivial to include a VM template.

      "
        - an obvious good thing for the Ubuntu ecosystem. It also, in the eyes of millions of users validates Linux as a usable operating system."

      As an alternative to cmd.exe.

      (As far as I know you can't run mir or X.org or wayland on top of the Linux personality of the Windows 10 kernel, and there are a lot of other limitations.

      Microsoft seems to only have done this work to:
      - run docker containers on Windows server
      - prevent developers running Mac OS X or Linux if they need to develop server-side apps to.run on Linux - ideally for MS as VMs on Azure or docker containers on Windows server
      Please show proof of anything they have included which isn't strictly required by these two use cases if you think this is good for Linux, e.g. how a developer can develop and test Linux GUI apps on Windows 10 using this feature alone).

    5. Re:LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WPF does not use Win32 UI widgets. It has its own components. The framework in .NET that uses Win32 UI widgets is called System.Windows.Forms.

    6. Re:LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      and by Microsoft including Ubuntu inside Windows desktop environments,

      It allows Microsoft to control the Ubuntu "experience" and blame Ubuntu for any user dissatisfaction when it is really a Windows container problem. "Look, see, you can run Ubuntu and doesn't Windows actually run much better and faster?"

      it allows hundreds of millions of users try Ubuntu without having to wipe their disk, re-partition it, install a hypervisor

      Hundreds of millions of users can already run Ubuntu without having to do any of that. I have two USB sticks with Xubuntu on them that boot just fine on my Windows computers, and that's a 16.4 version, I think. Making that stick was absolutely trivial -- I used a bootable Xubuntu DVD and told it to install on /dev/sde.

      Not two days ago I came across a bag full of old USB sticks and one of them has a label "Ubuntu" on it. It was much harder to make back in them good ole days, but it, too, is a Ubuntu system unencumbered by an underlying Windows OS.

      how exactly does preventing large donors from donating "help" the Linux Foundation?

      It doesn't. But preventing large donors who have a vested interest in the failure of Linux as FOSS does. Isn't /. the forum where we hear regular diatribes against large campaign donations because they "buy" the political system? Isn't there a parallel here?

      As for the summary saying how great it is that it bring "SQL Server" to Linux, I say "why?" MySQL, Postgres, and a handful of other, better, databases already exist. What does SQL Server add?

    7. Re:LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Good thing the Linux foundation has roughly zero to do with stewardship of Linux development, other than paying Linus's salary, which he doesn't really need.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    8. Re:LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      It doesn't. But preventing large donors who have a vested interest in the failure of Linux as FOSS does.

      So let's look at the other platinum donors.

      - Oracle has a vested interest in the failure of Linux since it owns Solaris. It has also arguably been actively trying to damage Red Hat by forking its distro.
      - Intel has a vested interest in the failure of Linux because it has a very close economic partnership with Microsoft.
      - HPE has a vested interest in the failure of Linux because it sells hardware that runs Windows and HP/UX.
      - IBM has a vested interest in the failure of Linux because it sells mainframes and servers running AIX. ... and so on.

      Or maybe these companies are all platinum members of the Linux Foundation because they see Linux both as a massive market opportunity in its own right and also an enabler of new product development.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    9. Re:LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are being rational on Slashdot. Odd, but refreshing. Thank you.

    10. Re:LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by Tharkkun · · Score: 1

      and by Microsoft including Ubuntu inside Windows desktop environments,

      It allows Microsoft to control the Ubuntu "experience" and blame Ubuntu for any user dissatisfaction when it is really a Windows container problem. "Look, see, you can run Ubuntu and doesn't Windows actually run much better and faster?"

      it allows hundreds of millions of users try Ubuntu without having to wipe their disk, re-partition it, install a hypervisor

      Hundreds of millions of users can already run Ubuntu without having to do any of that. I have two USB sticks with Xubuntu on them that boot just fine on my Windows computers, and that's a 16.4 version, I think. Making that stick was absolutely trivial -- I used a bootable Xubuntu DVD and told it to install on /dev/sde.

      Not two days ago I came across a bag full of old USB sticks and one of them has a label "Ubuntu" on it. It was much harder to make back in them good ole days, but it, too, is a Ubuntu system unencumbered by an underlying Windows OS.

      how exactly does preventing large donors from donating "help" the Linux Foundation?

      It doesn't. But preventing large donors who have a vested interest in the failure of Linux as FOSS does. Isn't /. the forum where we hear regular diatribes against large campaign donations because they "buy" the political system? Isn't there a parallel here?

      As for the summary saying how great it is that it bring "SQL Server" to Linux, I say "why?" MySQL, Postgres, and a handful of other, better, databases already exist. What does SQL Server add?

      Yes of course. Everyone should have to run their OS off a USB stick. What the hell. Integration is the path to success. Keeping them separate will continue down the path of 0 acceptance of Linux on the Desktop except for power users.

    11. Re:LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by Kjella · · Score: 1

      The Ubuntu Windows thing is designed to hurt Linux by giving people a reason to not run Linux, instead allowing them to avoid Linux and run Linux apps on Windows, this will weaken the Linux user base and the Linux kernel.

      The kernel is supported by everything from Android to supercomputers and it really wouldn't matter if desktop share fell to 0%. Many if not most of the major open source apps like Firefox, LibreOffice, GIMP etc. already run on Windows, there are no Linux-only "killer apps" to sell out. Think of it as a LiveCD with less effort, just try it... you can try out how much of your needs it covers and I think Ubuntu can only gain by Windows users getting a taste. Those who feel it actually works 100% for them won't be coming back just because you can now run it inside a different OS.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    12. Re:LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Yes of course. Everyone should have to run their OS off a USB stick.

      Oh, knock it off. I didn't say that. The original statement was that it "allows hundreds of millions of users try Ubuntu" (emphasis mine). A USB 3 memory stick has plenty of performance to allow users to try Ubuntu without needing a Windows platform under it, or letting Microsoft control the Ubuntu "experience".

    13. Re:LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      - Oracle has a vested interest in the failure of Linux since it owns Solaris.

      It also owns MySQL, as I recall, which runs great on Linux servers. Solaris is (was) a great OS, but hardly a major player in the desktop like Windows.

      - Intel has a vested interest in the failure of Linux because it has a very close economic partnership with Microsoft.

      Intel doesn't give a crap which OS you run on their CPUs just as long as you aren't using an AMD or ARM CPU to do it.

      - HPE has a vested interest in the failure of Linux because it sells hardware that runs Windows and HP/UX.

      Ditto HPE. HP/UX is a niche compared to Windows, and HP doesn't care if you're running Windows or Linux as long as you're doing it on HP hardware.

      - IBM has a vested interest in the failure of Linux because it sells mainframes and servers running AIX. ... and so on.

      Ditto IBM.

      Or maybe these companies are all platinum members of the Linux Foundation because they see Linux both as a massive market opportunity in its own right and also an enabler of new product development.

      Microsoft doesn't do hardware (as a primary function), they do operating system software and other software tied intimately into their operating system. HPE, IBM, Dell, etc. do hardware as the primary function and software as an also-ran. That makes Microsoft a different player in the market than all those hardware companies.

    14. Re:LF charter should ban maker of competing OSs by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Oracle and IBM do a ton more business with Linux than they do with their own OSes which they've long since effectively given up on.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
  18. Hot Damn! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Devil here. Just wanted to confirm that, yes, it's cold enough to freeze the balls off a brass monkey.

  19. good to know by penguinoid · · Score: 1

    Where's that guy who's sig predicted that Windows would one day be a Linux distro?

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    1. Re:good to know by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      It's not my sig, but I've been saying for some time now that Microsoft will eventually debut a version of Linux (mostly to infect the market).

      Then we'll see MS Office on Linux (but it'll only able to run properly on "MS Linux") as well as other stuff integrated into it...the same way cancer 'integrates' into your body.

      It makes perfect sense: FOSS people do all the heavy lifting for decades to create a better, more secure OS than Windows, then Microsoft swoops in, co-opts it, and makes tons of money off of it. It's like letting your neighbor build a house and then, when he's not looking, moving in and taking over the first floor.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    2. Re:good to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can a guy be sig? Stupid niigger.

  20. perspective by Danathar · · Score: 4, Funny

    This year: - Trump became president elect - The cubs win the world series...playing the INDIANS no less! - Apple stops having growth - Microsoft joins the Linux foundation If we have too many more things happen my head will explode and melt away. What's next? The discovery of real Unicorns?

    1. Re:perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was hoping the 'what's next' would be a system that is better, cheaper AND faster. Or faster, better AND cheaper. Or . . .

    2. Re: perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I heard a rumor that a slashdotter actually ventured out of his moms basement and met a girl!

    3. Re:perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their are real unicorns of the sea: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narwhal

    4. Re:perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      somebody up vote this, in 10 years this may be regarded as the quote of the decade. That is if the Unicorns haven't taken over and shut off the Internet.

    5. Re:perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2016 really has been one of the best years on record, hasn't it? I'm looking for the MacBook Portless to be the final nail in Apple's coffin - the reviews of it have been BRUTAL with Mac-specific sites going out of their way to recommend better Windows laptops. The specs in it are so bad that it's only an "upgrade" if you're using a laptop that's at least 5 years old. Apple is dying, America is coming back, Microsoft is finally embracing Linux - it's a great time to be alive!

    6. Re:perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh "unicorns" exist, they're just hard to find, and it's probably in a different context than you're thinking...

    7. Re:perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      world series?

      don't you have to play teams in the world, rather then one country, for that to happen?

    8. Re:perspective by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 2

      This year: - Trump became president elect - The cubs win the world series...playing the INDIANS no less! - Apple stops having growth - Microsoft joins the Linux foundation

      And don't forget that Google just joined Microsoft's .NET Foundation...

      Please Lord, if you're listening, TAKE ME NOW.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    9. Re:perspective by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      2016 really has been one of the best years on record, hasn't it?

      Only if by "best" you mean "worst", then yes, it's been one of the 'best' years on record.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    10. Re:perspective by AntronArgaiv · · Score: 1

      This year:

      - Trump became president elect
      - The cubs win the world series...playing the INDIANS no less!
      - Apple stops having growth
      - Microsoft joins the Linux foundation

      If we have too many more things happen my head will explode and melt away. What's next? The discovery of real Unicorns?

      ...my flying car?
      (personal jetpacks seem more likely: http://jetpackaviation.com/)

    11. Re:perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This year: - Trump became president elect - The cubs win the world series...playing the INDIANS no less! - Apple stops having growth - Microsoft joins the Linux foundation

      And don't forget that Google just joined Microsoft's .NET Foundation...

      Also, Bob Dylan won the Nobel Prize. Freaking year, yeah.

    12. Re:perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, because Justice Scalia died? Or do you just really hate Chicago?

      Justice Scalia dying may have been a blessing in disguise - apparently the thought of Hillary getting to decide on Supreme Court justices helped push the Trump campaign to victory because the majority of Americans do NOT want that woman in the White House.

      2016 is going to go down as a turning point in American history, when America stopped feeling guilty about being America and reclaimed its destiny as a true world power.

    13. Re:perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you 2016!

    14. Re:perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With all the stuff you listed, what makes you think there is "a next"? They look all like sure signs of the apocalypse to me.

    15. Re:perspective by devent · · Score: 1

      Here is your unicorn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
    16. Re:perspective by Insanity+Defense · · Score: 1

      world series?

      don't you have to play teams in the world, rather then one country, for that to happen?

      Two countries. The Blue Jays are a Canadian team and have won the "World" series.

    17. Re:perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is seriously the first /. post I have actually laughed out loud to in a long time!

    18. Re:perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And its people will pay dearly with higher unemployment, rampant racism and sexism, damaging foreign relationships, and driving the wedge between the haves and have-nots, effectively killing the middle class. America elected a reality TV star who's also a failed business-man, who proved he knows nothing about technology ("I know all about the cyber"), knows nothing about economics, and by his own actions approves of grabbing women in their groin unsolicited, which indicates he knows little about society, either.

      He's an embarrassment to this nation, and a bunch of trolls/idiots have fallen for the marketing, "Make America Great Again". He's so clueless that he launched a site asking the people how to make America great again, which is tacit admission that he has no plan. Anybody who knows anything knows that between Tumblr, Twitter, and 4chan, the shitposting to that MAGA site will make it impossible to get a real response, meaning either zilch will come of it, or we'll get clearly troll-ish suggestions enacted into law.

      This year will be remembered as a turn for the worse in this country, and I'll be here to tell everyone "I told you so". Unlike the protesters, however, I *did* vote, and will continue to as it's my civic duty. Sadly, Idiocracy was not a comedy; it was a documentary.

  21. systemd by gti_guy · · Score: 1

    *NOW* the adoption of systemd makes sense!

  22. Just in time! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just as Apple is exiting the "Pro" market there are signs of a new entrant.

  23. Microsoft Toxicity & Downs Syndrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They just want to ensure they have a backdoor into every Linux system running their software. Microsofts past partnership with mass surveillance and selling user data they'll definitely find a way to sink their talons into Linux. Microsoft isn't the good guy. Windows is barely considered an acceptable platform anymore for office productivity or server administration. I used to love being an admin, Microsoft has made my life 100 times more difficult since Windows 8 & Server 2008. CAL's and subscription based platform should be illegal for an operating system, it's almost blackmail after a few years of being on their services. The price of SQL server alone will blow your mind. Costs have tripled for everyone from a home server and small business to corporation and government. The world deserves better than being treated like this. It's almost as if Microsoft has a disdain for their own consumers. Microsoft is toxic under Nadella, stay away. Stay far far away.

  24. Makes perfect sense - it's their next phase by ErichTheRed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft is completely done selling operating systems and software the way they were previously. Everything they're doing is 100% dedicated to getting people over to Azure, spending money by the hour forever rather than getting a one-time license payment. The company I work for is building a huge new project in Azure and it's amazing how much money Microsoft makes just by keeping data centers running on their services from failing...the bills are thousands per month and we're a tiny customer.

    If they can make that much money just keeping the power and Internet flowing, why not outsource the development of operating systems to Linux? In that case joining the Linux Foundation makes sense. Windows Server 2016 is probably going to be the last "boxed" release of server software from them -- the push is to move workloads to Azure Service Fabric and rebuild everything as microservices anyway. All of their products are moving to the "Azure first" development model -- release everything to Azure first, then box it up as of a certain date and ship it to customers who want to pay for on-site licenses.

    In about 10 or 15 years, Microsoft will be where IBM is now -- they will have an assured stream of perpetual revenue coming from customers who aren't locked into a particular OS, but are locked into them as a service provider. (True, you can switch cloud providers, but did I mention they're making it insanely easy for Microsoft customers to migrate in from the on-premises world?)

    1. Re:Makes perfect sense - it's their next phase by Tharkkun · · Score: 1

      Microsoft is completely done selling operating systems and software the way they were previously. Everything they're doing is 100% dedicated to getting people over to Azure, spending money by the hour forever rather than getting a one-time license payment. The company I work for is building a huge new project in Azure and it's amazing how much money Microsoft makes just by keeping data centers running on their services from failing...the bills are thousands per month and we're a tiny customer.

      If they can make that much money just keeping the power and Internet flowing, why not outsource the development of operating systems to Linux? In that case joining the Linux Foundation makes sense. Windows Server 2016 is probably going to be the last "boxed" release of server software from them -- the push is to move workloads to Azure Service Fabric and rebuild everything as microservices anyway. All of their products are moving to the "Azure first" development model -- release everything to Azure first, then box it up as of a certain date and ship it to customers who want to pay for on-site licenses.

      In about 10 or 15 years, Microsoft will be where IBM is now -- they will have an assured stream of perpetual revenue coming from customers who aren't locked into a particular OS, but are locked into them as a service provider. (True, you can switch cloud providers, but did I mention they're making it insanely easy for Microsoft customers to migrate in from the on-premises world?)

      For most companies hosting your applications in the cloud is cheaper than running a data center, populating it with equipment, maintenance and hiring staff to work on it. Just because it seems expensive means you didn't price out the alternative.

    2. Re:Makes perfect sense - it's their next phase by giampy · · Score: 1

      Also, in about 15 or 20 years, it might make sense for them to rely on the Linux kernel for the next windows version, rather than having to throw resources at developing and maintaining their own separate old windows kernel ... we'll see

      --
      We learn from history that we learn nothing from history - Tom Veneziano
    3. Re:Makes perfect sense - it's their next phase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you mean by "insanely easy?" You know that "insanely" means "like a mentally ill person," not "extremely," right?

    4. Re:Makes perfect sense - it's their next phase by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Windows Server is still profitable. But there are plenty of Linux users out there, it's a huge market. It would be stupid for Microsoft to not cater to it on Azure. Furthermore, even the existing Windows customers need some Linux these days, and if you can't offer a package that can do both, they'll go to someone who can.

  25. infiltration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once code development depends on MS, MS controls code development.

  26. 2016 just keeps on delivering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the last 30 days alone, the Cubs won the World Series, Donald Trump was elected to the Presidency, and Microsoft announced it is joining the Linux Foundation.

    WTF is happening?

    1. Re:2016 just keeps on delivering by mark_reh · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a vast right-wing conspiracy to me.

  27. FUCK YOU 2016 by Thud457 · · Score: 5, Funny

    YASOTET - Yet Another Sign Of the End Times
    Note that rapture index - record high 189 - 10 Oct 2016

    Satan says "damn Russian hackers hacked my Nest thermostat"

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:FUCK YOU 2016 by megamind · · Score: 1

      I feel like I am living in an alternate reality.

  28. And that's how Linux died by frovingslosh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Step 1: Join

    Step 2: Destroy from within

    Seriously, does no one in the Linux organization see any problem with this? Microsoft pays money (peanuts to them) and can now influence Linux? Microsoft is capable of every dirty trick in the book. They have a habit of betraying "business partners", even I.B.M. They are the people who, through a Windows "security update" modified the eeprom on my notebook's NIC so that it wouldn't work in Linux and put code in Windows so that they could reinitialize it properly. When you make a deal with the devil you're not bringing him closer to your point of view, you can only expect to sink to his level.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re:And that's how Linux died by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can they influence Linux?

    2. Re:And that's how Linux died by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 0

      Microsoft will work to pack the board members and other influential entities in the foundation with pro-Microsoft zealots who will then their very best to hobble Linux in whatever ways they can. It may take a few years but mark my words, this is what will happen.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    3. Re:And that's how Linux died by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Step 1: Join
      Step 2: Eeer what were we doing again?

      No many people don't see a problem with the strategy, not because MS is inherently less evil than in the past but they are just that much more directionless and lacking of any vision.

    4. Re:And that's how Linux died by wicka_wicka · · Score: 1

      They don't have any problem with it because they aren't perpetually stuck in the laughable mindset that Microsoft is a pantomime villain incapable of change. Making an enemy of Microsoft for no reason other than "they were mean to us in the 90s" is an idiotic and childish suggestion.

      --
      hi
    5. Re:And that's how Linux died by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Naive

    6. Re:And that's how Linux died by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Making an enemy of Microsoft for no reason other than "they were mean to us in the 90s" is an idiotic and childish suggestion.

      Hey, they were mean to me in the 80s, too. And in the 2000s they were especially mean to Linux, going as far as funding the SCO lawsuits.

    7. Re:And that's how Linux died by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy fuck, do you really believe what you said? Have you ever heard of Stephen Elop or Nokia? This isn't ancient history for fucks sake. Jesus Christ some people are naive.
      "I'm a good person therefore everyone else in the world must be just like me."
      That's not how the world works my friend. And the corporate world....they'll eat you alive and jizz on your corpse.

    8. Re:And that's how Linux died by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because they are on the linux foundations board, and get a say in the direction linux is taking.
      linus torvalds is an employee of the linux foundation, so MS is indirectly his boss now.

    9. Re:And that's how Linux died by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget the Android tax.

    10. Re:And that's how Linux died by wicka_wicka · · Score: 1

      The Nokia purchase has fuck all to do with this, but even if it were somehow relevant, that happened under entirely different management! Microsoft under Nadella is practically a new corporation. There is quite literally zero reason to suggest that they want to get involved with Linux for anything other than making Linux better. You know why? Because improving Linux, in this era - NOT the 20 years ago era you can't same to move on from - benefits Microsoft financially.

      --
      hi
  29. Anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has anyone mentioned that this is the Embrace phase yet?

  30. Chilly by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

    OK, so that is why it is so cold here in the UAE now, only 24 Celsius - someone must have left the door to hell open.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  31. In other news by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    "Microsoft today said it is joining the Linux Foundation as a high-paying Platinum member

    In other news, cancer said today that it's joining your body as a parasitic member to your lifespan.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:In other news by Megol · · Score: 1

      Grow up...

    2. Re:In other news by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Grow up...

      No.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  32. If hell freezes over by postmortem · · Score: 1

    ...will it help with the global warming?

    1. Re:If hell freezes over by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      The amount of energy used to refrigerate hell will be enormous and will accelerate global warming.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
  33. Ugh they just want to infiltrate. by Tyr07 · · Score: 1

    They're not really being open source, I mean in spirit I don't believe so.

    What it is, is the crap they're pulling on windows is pissing off a lot of people. People are getting sick of it, and it's showing as anyone more technically inclined if they are able to for software reasons are drop microsoft like a bad habbit. Turning off updates, refusing to switch to windows 10 etc.

    So they need to attack the opposition and alternatives, so that you can't except their datamining traffic system that they use to sell your personal data. If they can get everything integrated with windows so people find it more useful, everything in one place, to eventually start to promote the windows with linux to reduce usage of pure linux or to influence it's development to include parts of windows into linux distros so they can keep their greasy hands in everything.

    It's the same strategy as anything else. Like all the telco companies in Canada. They snuff out any competition that is small enough or disrupts their price fixing, then all set their prices to roughly the same with the same service that's overpriced, so you have no alternative and it's a non issue.

    If another company crops up that provides a better alternative they'll work hard to shut them down so they can keep being greedy.with overpriced services and tactics that invade your privacy.

    1. Re:Ugh they just want to infiltrate. by Megol · · Score: 1

      Tinfoil hat time? Tinfoil hat time!

    2. Re:Ugh they just want to infiltrate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H27rfr59RiE

    3. Re:Ugh they just want to infiltrate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tinfoil hat time? Tinfoil hat time!

      I believe I was reading a study where tinfoil hats actually conduct wireless signals. Maybe a Faraday cage nuclear bunker?

    4. Re:Ugh they just want to infiltrate. by Tyr07 · · Score: 1

      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.

      But everytime you go "But they've changed or are behaving differently now" I'm going to chase you going 'Sheeple time? Sheeple time!'

  34. Naturally. They feel right at home with systemd. by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    Of course they joined. Since systemd Linux is pratically part of the family. ...

    FLAMEWAR in 3 .. 2 .. 1 ..

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  35. "World Domination through World Cooperation" by SysEngineer · · Score: 1

    “First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, and then you win.” In 2004 and 2005 these were the mottos of Linux. On TVLinux, I stated that Microsoft will embrace Linux. People told me I was crazy.

    I told you this would happen!!

  36. Supposing they want to embrace... by xvan · · Score: 1

    The only important stuff on from the Linux Foundation is the LSB, and I see it mostly as a "Do everything the redhat way".
    What evil could they do inside there? The real evil should be inside the kernel development community, and nobody is screaming against MS submitted patches.

  37. RIP Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RIP Linux. Linux is dead. Long live Linux.

  38. Platinum no less by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 1

    Did they shell out a full $37? Showoffs!

    --

    I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
  39. I would welcome MS-Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Things would just fucking work, as opposed to the current mess.

  40. MS is trying to do to linux what by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    Trump did to the republicans and democrats.

  41. Goodbye Linux foundation by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    Nice knowing ya.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  42. Still waiting... by shaitand · · Score: 1

    When they contribute serious resources to the Samba and Wine projects in a sincere effort to create truely seemless interoperability, port visual studio and other MS development tools, and then use those capabilities to make the open and closed .net implementations and have true feature parity I'll take notice. Oh and get rid of their anti-competitive attempts to own the browser. Nobody should own the browser, period.

    1. Re:Still waiting... by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      At least make the browser multi-platform, or failing that have it use webkit/blink.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
  43. I have been here 15 years ago. I remember... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have no idea what is going on. But it is Microsoft. The Microsoft as it has always been.
    in any case that is the idea of free software. Everyone can compile it. Some people may extend it but there are very few who will fully understand it.
    I'll be compiling my own kernels.

  44. It's like I'm taking crazy pills! by sgant · · Score: 1

    Remember the days of Bill Gates as a Borg on every Microsoft story here? Remember the days of MS being written as "M$"? Remember the days of every geek worth their salt on Slashdot loathed Microsoft? My my, times have changed. I for one, welcome it.

    --

    "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
  45. Re:It's about fucking time!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, ODBC on Linux would be absolutely maaarvelous.

  46. april 1st by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    its all a dream/nightmare. not november at all, actually its April 1st. one big fat joke is being played on us. cant wait till I wake up and life is back to a normal micro$oft hates linux.

  47. Idiots!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft will do everything they can to slow down the progress of the Linux Foundation. Don't be so stupid, Microsoft will always be M$.

  48. Embrace and Extend by gabrieltss · · Score: 1

    Typical Microsoft.... They will embrace Linux then extend it with their own proprietary cr@pola like they have done with everything else.

    --
    The Truth is a Virus!!!
  49. How About Netflix ? by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    Microsoft's Silver Light is compulsory to run NetFlix on Linux. If there is any good will sought-after, Microsoft should end that situation.

  50. "embrace" commences.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or are we at the "Extend" phase now?

  51. Re:It's about fucking time!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ODBC DOES exist on Linux(and Unix in general). It is terrible.

  52. Embrace, extend and extinguish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

    CAPCHA: Agreed

  53. The outcome of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    will be very similar to that famous scene from the movie Aliens.

  54. Linux won by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
    Apparently we entered the final stage

  55. Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about android? Linux Foundation members share a patent portfolio and enjoy protection from patent law cases from other members.
    So will MS stop their MS-Android-tax now? If not, won't Linux Foundation have any problems with it? MS must be paying well...

  56. This is otherwise known as... by Helldesk+Hound · · Score: 1

    This is otherwise known as "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer".

  57. Re:It's about fucking time!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do that, and you lose one of the best features of all UNIX-likes: versatility. A single graphics API, a single audio API, and so on -- if it's going to get 90%+ adoption -- is guaranteed to be designed by committee and be full of half-baked ideas or undergo so much API churn that only the fanatical will be able to keep up. We're already seeing attempts of this sort of shit by PulseAudio, systemd, and to some degrees GNOME. FreeDesktop in general is trying to turn GNU/Linux into a single OS; with them at the top, of course.

    Standards sound great on paper, but the result is generally something a bit more XKCD-like. Part of the Bazaar's charm is the sheer amount of choice you have in your computing. That choice can be overwhelming, but you can usually rule out at least half of the available packages by answering some pointed questions about your computing. The benefit of the Cathedral is it's generally a stable and dependable structure, but good luck moving that building elsewhere or repurposing it for a different task.

    One of the best parts about the current libre software ecosystem is if, say, GNOME shits the bed, I can swoop in with KDE, XFCE, or even just a straight window manager, and carry on with my work. With a "single software stack standard" (4S? Neat ring to it), if something shits the bed or has a security vulnerability I'm _stuck with it_, meaning I'll likely have to dive into the code and/or look for patches just to make my system work again. Sure, people do that already in the current ecosystem, but most do it because they *want* to, not because they *have* to. Big difference.

    "Professionals" taking over Linux will ruin it with their myriad over-abstractions and insistence on a single solution for everyone. Everyone's needs are not identical, and a piece of software cannot possibly fulfill every user need. It's the entire reason we have things like vim, Sublime, emacs, and the various IDEs. What works for one person won't work for another, and for a lot of us that even comes down to the nitty gritty like init system or even a specific libc. What you're advocating is turning GNU/Linux into Windows, inheriting all the downfalls alongside whatever menial benefit that may be had with homogenization.