Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft and Canonical Make Custom Linux Kernel (neowin.net)

Posted by msmash on from the how-about-that dept.

Billly Gates writes: Microsoft and Canonical's relationship is getting closer besides Ubuntu for Windows. Azure will soon be offering more customized Ubuntu containers with a MS optimized kernel. Uname -r will show 4.11.0-1011-azure for Ubuntu cloud based 16.04 LTS. If you want the non MS kernel you can still use it on Azure by typing:
$ sudo apt install linux-virtual linux-cloud-tools-virtual
$ sudo apt purge linux*azure
$ sudo reboot
The article mentions several benefits over the generic Linux kernel for Azure

121 comments

  1. Does it provide necessary features? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Such as native hooks for telemetry?

    1. Re:Does it provide necessary features? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget the malware API either.

    2. Re:Does it provide necessary features? by enrique556 · · Score: 2

      You may laugh, but their preview of MS SQL server for linux actually includes a telemetry service which automatically starts (a dependency I'm guessing) when you start the sql service. When you stop the sql service, of course, that doesn't stop the telemetry.
      I suppose it's fair that a preview would include telemetry, but there you go, they already have telemetry for linux systems.

    3. Re:Does it provide necessary features? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How dare they want to get stats on how well their software is working and on any errors that may happen in it! Blasphemers!

    4. Re:Does it provide necessary features? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "it's just a flesh wound": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhRUe-gz690

    5. Re:Does it provide necessary features? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *puke* pls tell me this stuff is no where near being up-streamed.

    6. Re:Does it provide necessary features? by hduff · · Score: 0

      As well as support Linux-specific BSODs? That's cool.

      EMBRACE
      EXTEND
      EXTINGUISH

      --
      "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
    7. Re:Does it provide necessary features? by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      They can do that with their product but keep it out of mine. Linux isn't their product. This is blatantly embrace extend extinguish.

      There'll be a lot of those kernels recompiled with the code removed, guaranteed. Such is the nature of open source.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
  2. FTFY by El+Cubano · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you want the non MS kernel you can still use it by not using Microsoft's cloud platform in the first place

    There. FTFY.

    Now, this is a serious question, but what reason could someone have for running Linux on Azure? Are there not any of a multitude of other better platforms out there for running Linux? I mean, I certainly understand if you are all in for Microsoft with things like Exchange, SQL server, AD, Sharepoint, etc., their cloud platform sort of make sense. But this, Ubuntu (or any other Linux) on Azure is something that simply does not make sense to me.

    1. Re:FTFY by swb · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think Microsoft is giving away a certain amount of Azure to anybody who uses O365 in any significant way, and there's probably a lot of mixed infrastructure shops with both MS and Linux running. What better way to lure them in deeper?

      At the end of the day, MS values them more as cloud resource consumers than software licensees.

      It might even make sense for someone who can run a workload on any cloud stack to figure out how to arbitrage their workload where it's cheapest, gain cross-cloud redundancy, etc.

    2. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      So you run Linux on Azure because Windows is the "Gold Standard"? Do you also drive a red car because green is your favorite color?

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

      Some of us actually work in the real world, where Windows is the Gold Standard and is usually a requirement for certain business software packages. Not everyone is sitting home playing Tux Racer and writing GCC code.

      If you weren't too busy worrying about which 20-yr old deprecated Windows protocol you still have to support because it's "the Gold Standard" will bite your ass off, you'd have plenty of time to go fuck yourself.

    4. Re:FTFY by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Some of us actually work in the real world, where Windows is the Gold Standard and is usually a requirement for certain business software packages. Not everyone is sitting home playing Tux Racer and writing GCC code.

      If you weren't too busy worrying about which 20-yr old deprecated Windows protocol you still have to support because it's "the Gold Standard" will bite your ass off, you'd have plenty of time to go fuck yourself.

      There's a fuckton of hardware out there that offers windows fileshare functionality. And requires SMB 1, which is horribly insecure and deprecated and should be disabled. And most of that hardware is running some kind of Linux.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    5. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ya know, not all of us are help desk droids like you for windoze machines. Some of us are programming for macs, linux, ios, android, sql, web,etc, probably there are a few mainframe programmers here.
      Anyways, just got back to work you little m$ shill. Enough of you. Satya is watching you!

    6. Re:FTFY by Billly+Gates · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If you want the non MS kernel you can still use it by not using Microsoft's cloud platform in the first place

      There. FTFY.

      Now, this is a serious question, but what reason could someone have for running Linux on Azure? Are there not any of a multitude of other better platforms out there for running Linux? I mean, I certainly understand if you are all in for Microsoft with things like Exchange, SQL server, AD, Sharepoint, etc., their cloud platform sort of make sense. But this, Ubuntu (or any other Linux) on Azure is something that simply does not make sense to me.

      FYI I am the submitter

      The answer is easy. Corporations who already use Azure with Azure Active Directory and Office 365. Visual Studio support and the customers' internal developers are used to the Azure API's and frameworks as they use it for their other Windows specific services. Might as well keep using the APIs and frameworks for their other platforms rather than learning Amazon and dealing with 2 clouds.

      Microsoft also bundles Azure licensing too for enterprise customers so it maybe a little cheaper if you already have Azure credits to just fire up a Linux container if the boss for example wants to close one of the datacenters to cut electricity costs and move their Linux based servers. Amazon already contributes alot of Linux code to get it run on their E3 and E5 platforms I guess this is not surprising that MS is doing the same.

      Microsoft's incentive to being friendly to OSS and Linux now is to make money this way. Microsoft makes money either way in this model whether you run Windows or not. I have not written any software on Azure but it supports FreeBSD as well and RedHat. Maybe the Redhat image already has an MS optimized kernel that I am not aware of? Visual Studio does have IOT Python support for Azure so it looks like they really are not doing win32 lockin at all with Azure but I could be wrong. Anyone knowledge care to comment and how it compares to Amazon's cloud services?

      I figured this story would make slashdotters uncomfortable, but I kind of like this arrangement.

        If you do not want to use their products don't. MS doesn't have to Extend, Expand, and Extinguish standards or lock things down to win32 which we all hate! Rather they make the APIs available to all platforms and several languages to their cloud offerings so you an keep using Linux or use Amazon if you want. However, the downside is the cloud framework hooks lock you into Azure. Amazon though sadly is doing the same. So the OS now is Azure and Windows is just one of the shells on top. Linux is another.

      --
      http://saveie6.com/
    7. Re:FTFY by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      There's a fuckton of hardware out there that offers windows fileshare functionality. And requires SMB 1, which is horribly insecure and deprecated and should be disabled. And most of that hardware is running some kind of Linux.

      SMB 2 and 3 for all intents and purposes also lead to atrocious security outcomes. Safer to only run these things over IPsec if your concerned about security.

    8. Re:FTFY by MrKaos · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Some of us actually work in the real world, where Windows is the Gold Standard and is usually a requirement for certain business software packages.

      The gold standard for business computing *IS* Linux based systems, the game was over for windows in this space years ago. MicroSoft lost all credibility in data centres around 20 years ago when NT screensavers would activate on headless servers and consume most of the CPU time of the system. It took MS until Win Server 2012 to have a decent file system and NT could only pass C2 (Orange Book) security standards when you refrained from plugging it into a network.

      Azure is barely a player compared to the GCC compiled versions of Xen which is run AWS, you know, Amazon's platform and even commercial offerings like VMware, which trounce Azure for functionality are based on Linux.

      Windows is a desktop operating system and even there it is becoming less relevant e.v.e.r.y.d.a.y and the only business software you are talking about is for small business, which, in itself is a massive market but constantly being eroded by new web offerings. So the only markets left for Microfost are platform owners who they can convince to use .Net which generally ends up with upwards of double the TCO of a software stack hosted on a Linux server. MS would practically fellate you to take on their stack. Do you even vaguely know what you are talking about Mr AC?

      What you *don't* get, that Microsoft *does* get is that Open Source Software isn't going away. It is a fait acompli.

      Not everyone is sitting home playing Tux Racer and writing GCC code.

      Maybe they are playing GTA on their windows machine? Games are a massive market for Microsift and whilst there is no reason for them to go away it is inevitable that widows transforms to a Linux machine. The writing has been on the wall for a long time and MS has been taking baby steps towards it because the rest of the technology industry has moved on and they want to survive.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    9. Re:FTFY by darkain · · Score: 1

      " VMware dropped development of ESX at version 4.1, and now uses ESXi, which does not include a Linux kernel." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      It has been seven years since VMWare dropped the Linux kernel.

    10. Re:FTFY by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Microsoft the Gold Standard. I've worked two places that are looking at Azure and it's made using Linux actually easier.

      "Hey boss, I need some cheap servers to test something out, I can do it with Microsoft". We get billed. I get to use Linux. The company gets "Microsoft".

    11. Re:FTFY by jon3k · · Score: 1

      I think a lot of environments are mostly Microsoft with a handful of Linux servers.

    12. Re:FTFY by MrKaos · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wow, it hasn't even been 10 minutes and something that is not even critical of MS and just paints their reality has been down-modded?

      Looks like there is some power shilling going on here or are you so sensitive to some non existent ad-homiem attack? Concerned about my spelling, I did say that I post post hungover, occasionally. Go ahead, mod me down, it just shows how much more credible my argument is and that the truth really hurts.

      Look if it makes you feel better, I thing the MS Server line has come a long way, finally a decent file system and I like the MS is taking a stand on some issues even if it is noise. Microsoft added WSL and because of that I gave Win 10 a chance when I finally got to the point that I realized I didn't need MS anywhere anymore. If you don't get it that I'm not being critical and just pointing to how things have changed then how do you expect to adapt to reality?

      That's what the technology industry is and that is what MS is doing.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    13. Re: FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AWS terms have clauses we can't legally agree to. Microsoft realized years ago we needed a speacial set of terms and gave them to us.

      We use Exchange, are licensed for office 365 etc so azure is also cheaper.

      At that point why not?

    14. Re:FTFY by Espectr0 · · Score: 1

      It's easier than you think.

      You have a company that sells hosting and server time (cutely called "cloud services" by marketing).

      You have clients that want to run linux. Would you as a company in that market deny them and let them go to the competition? If not, would something change if your company is Microsoft?

      --
      Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
    15. Re:FTFY by ElizabethGreene · · Score: 2

      Hi. I work for Microsoft as a Dedicated Support Engineer. I helped a customer setup three Linux boxes in Azure last week. Why? The boxes were Lucent DNS .ova appliances. They wanted to keep the cloud DNS infrastructure the same what was on premise. I helped them setup an Apache httpd reverse proxy too.

      Microsoft is not the company they used to be. If you don't believe that, you only have to look as far as the Top Linux kernel contributors list to see it.

    16. Re:FTFY by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      " VMware dropped development of ESX at version 4.1, and now uses ESXi, which does not include a Linux kernel." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      The paragraph before say ESX runs on bare metal (without running an operating system)[6] unlike other VMware products.[7] It includes its own kernel: A Linux kernel is started first,[8] and is then used to load a variety of specialized virtualization components, including ESX, which is otherwise known as the vmkernel component.[9] The Linux kernel is the primary virtual machine; it is invoked by the service console. At normal run-time, the vmkernel is running on the bare computer, and the Linux-based service console runs as the first virtual machine.

      It has been seven years since VMWare dropped the Linux kernel.

      which makes no difference to the point. Does VMware trounce Azure functionality yes. Thanks for letting me know they've transitioned off the Linux Kernel.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    17. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well how else would you understand it.

    18. Re:FTFY by somenickname · · Score: 2

      If you do not want to use their products don't. MS doesn't have to Extend, Expand, and Extinguish standards or lock things down to win32 which we all hate! Rather they make the APIs available to all platforms and several languages to their cloud offerings so you an keep using Linux or use Amazon if you want. However, the downside is the cloud framework hooks lock you into Azure. Amazon though sadly is doing the same. So the OS now is Azure and Windows is just one of the shells on top. Linux is another.

      Even as a borderline Fanatical Linux Guy, I'm pretty much OK with this. It sounds like they are just adding some kernel tweaks to make it work better with their hypervisor. No real drama there. Ubuntu has a bunch of different kernel flavors that are similar in nature.

      Having said that, if they start creeping into userspace, it's time to get out your pitchforks and torches.

    19. Re:FTFY by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

      If you do not want to use their products don't. MS doesn't have to Extend, Expand, and Extinguish standards or lock things down to win32 which we all hate! Rather they make the APIs available to all platforms and several languages to their cloud offerings so you an keep using Linux or use Amazon if you want. However, the downside is the cloud framework hooks lock you into Azure. Amazon though sadly is doing the same. So the OS now is Azure and Windows is just one of the shells on top. Linux is another.

      Even as a borderline Fanatical Linux Guy, I'm pretty much OK with this. It sounds like they are just adding some kernel tweaks to make it work better with their hypervisor. No real drama there. Ubuntu has a bunch of different kernel flavors that are similar in nature.

      Having said that, if they start creeping into userspace, it's time to get out your pitchforks and torches.

      They are are by replacing mono with .NET CORE 2.0 and Microsoft Code editor. It is not manditory to use these but it seems MS is not considering Windows their OS anymore. Rather Azure is there OS and Windows or Linux is the shell on top again. It makes sense since SQL Server for Linux .NET core and Microsoft Code are really to help mobile developers write code which of course is awesome if they use Azure IOT.

      I do not know if I like it, but I think it benefits users more than the when Bill Gates ran the show and made everything different as possible to encourage lockin. What I do not like about Amazon and Azure is that it is not just hosting an OS. The frameworks and APIs lock you in similiar to win32 and COM.

      I can see the lockin all over again. But this time the lockin will be on your Linux install as the code can only be run on the cloud.

      --
      http://saveie6.com/
    20. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This shit is gold, Jerry. Gold! It even mentions Gold! Golden turd! Polish it!

      Uh... You do realize that by using Linux on , you're really just using Linux? So the question here, instead of using virtualized Linux on Linux, why would anyone run it on Windows.

    21. Re:FTFY by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      If you want the non MS kernel you can still use it by not using Microsoft's cloud platform in the first place

      There. FTFY.

      Yeah, negotiating an enterprise license with an alternative vendor sounds much easier than typing 3 lines into a console :-)

      Now, this is a serious question, but what reason could someone have for running Linux on Azure? Are there not any of a multitude of other better platforms out there for running Linux?

      There are, but how many of those fit into existing enterprise agreements? How many of those use the same services by the same vendor as you're already doing business with?

      Ubuntu (or any other Linux) on Azure is something that simply does not make sense to me.

      You don't have a purchasing department or enterprise licenses where you work do you? The choice of vendor is often one you don't get to make. Be thankful that you have the technical options available to you from the existing vendors.

    22. Re:FTFY by Celarnor · · Score: 0

      Big Business with partner program/MS kickbacks or something?

      At the jobs I've had, the PMs would have come down hard on developers spending more to get less. An A0 instance (.75GB ram, 20 GB non-SSD storage) is like $15/month, while at Digital Ocean you can get the tier 2 droplet (1 GB ram, 30 GB SSD storage) for only $10, $5 less.

    23. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Azure is anything but "Gold Standard". Not everyone is playing Reading Rabbit and writing Visual Basic code you know!

    24. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An A0 instance (.75GB ram, 20 GB non-SSD storage) is like $15/month, while at Digital Ocean you can get the tier 2 droplet (1 GB ram, 30 GB SSD storage) for only $10, $5 less.

      For an extra $5 per month ($15 per month), you get unlimited bandwidth with 1GB RAM and 30GB SSD at DreamHost.

    25. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but does it run droplet?

    26. Re:FTFY by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 2

      If you want the non MS kernel you can still use it by not using Microsoft's cloud platform in the first place

      Exactly. And frankly, as someone who's worked with both platforms, Amazon's Web Services is a far better platform and has much better infrastructure than Azure.

      I've worked with both of them (currently working in an AWS shop) and although Azure has some great features, AWS is definitely better overall.

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

      Not everyone is sitting home playing Tux Racer and writing GCC code.

      You're right- where I work we use Linux on AWS to process tens of millions of medical transactions on a daily basis. Tux Racer sounds fun, but we have work to do and Microsoft is too slow, bloated, insecure, and expensive for us to bother with.

      For example, AWS just added MS SQL to their BAA catalog, and we couldn't be less interested if we tried. DynamoDB and Redshift work better, faster, and at a much lower cost than trying to spin up a bunch of clumsy Windows instances that stumble even under a moderate load.

      Also, AWS now bills Linux instances by the second- if you run for 5 minutes, that's what you're billed for: 5 minutes of run time.

      But Windows is billed by the hour and so of course it costs a shitload more than doing the heavy lifting with Linux instances. If you run for 5 minutes, you're billed for an hour. That sucks.

      Docker, Kubernetes, Ansible....all that stuff is waaaaaaay better on Linux.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    28. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah... well, thanks for perpetuating that pseudo gold standard for us, maybe next time try and actually stand up to something that's BS and talk plainly to your boss about what is a better choice from both business and technical perspective. Just because your boss might not be very technically competent doesn't make him/her an idiot who can only trust shiny blue stickers. Work on your communication skills.

    29. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't run any SMB versions. I only run NFS (v4) on my 7 clients and 3 servers.

    30. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha "unlimited" Have you read their "unlimited policy" ? Ubunutu 12 only? No REAL linux Debian/Centos/SUSE etc? Their VPS offerings are a joke compared to Linode/DigitalOcean/Vultr

    31. Re: FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So telling the truth gets you modded down now. Nice. I see slashdot hasn't changed. Stay classy.

    32. Re: FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt you have the skills to do any of that. You read from a script. Since it's the same environment they already have I suspect they did most of the heavy lifting while you put them on hold to google the answers and ask the Sr. Architect Joe for some help.

      Fucking shill.

    33. Re: FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was obvious years ago that the Microshills had taken over Slashdot. It's worse than ever now.

    34. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I do not like about Amazon and Azure is that it is not just hosting an OS. The frameworks and APIs lock you in similiar to win32 and COM.

      I can see the lockin all over again. But this time the lockin will be on your Linux install as the code can only be run on the cloud.

      It takes a bit of planning, but it is not difficult to create containerized systems/applications that are portable and can be deployed to Amazon/Azure/Google/your-local-system without any internal changes.

    35. Re:FTFY by PCM2 · · Score: 2

      Microsoft is not the company they used to be. If you don't believe that, you only have to look as far as the Top Linux kernel contributors list to see it.

      That's a joke. The only times Microsoft has made that list is when it added thousands of lines of code to the kernel to support its own stuff, like Hyper-V, Azure, etc. The reason Microsoft had to write all that code itself was because nobody else was interested.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    36. Re:FTFY by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      What I do not like about Amazon and Azure is that it is not just hosting an OS. The frameworks and APIs lock you in similiar to win32 and COM.

      I can see the lockin all over again. But this time the lockin will be on your Linux install as the code can only be run on the cloud.

      It takes a bit of planning, but it is not difficult to create containerized systems/applications that are portable and can be deployed to Amazon/Azure/Google/your-local-system without any internal changes.

      I can't find a link that I was watching on youtube a few months ago which highlighted the proprietary hooks problem. Basically a programmer was in charge to change the file size and compression ratio for 2.5 million pictures for a real estate client.

      How do you do this in Erlang or Python? He tried writing programs using ImageMagik but the I/O would take months even on an i7 to change! He used Amazon's proprietary framework/API to read the files and change them.

      You think this Erlang script can now run on any other platform but Amazon? There is E3 and E5. One is for just hosting. The other is a whole hooks of frameworks. Now add 2 years of different projects and all the sudden you have something proprietary that only works on Amazon. If Amazon raises the prices TOUGH your code will not work.

      Azure is the same way. Their cloud offerings if you look at the help content in Visual Studio you see a whole API suite that ties into Azure for many things. These IOT and Websites now require Azure to run.

      --
      http://saveie6.com/
    37. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Created a multithreaded control queue that is distributed across multiple systems. Doable in Pyrhon. Only part that might be proprietary is it you did auto-scaling.

    38. Re:FTFY by coolsnowmen · · Score: 1

      AWS is awesome, but- there is always a business fear of becoming beholden to a single provider. Because of that, any business that has a mature cloud-based usage is thinking, "hmm, what is my plan-B" ?

    39. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Microsoft is not the company they used to be."

      You're right. They're worse.

    40. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Created a multithreaded control queue that is distributed across multiple systems. Doable in Pyrhon. Only part that might be proprietary is it you did auto-scaling.

      The problem wasn't the threading latency. (DANG I wish I had the YouTube link) It was I/O and interrupt dependent. Even on the server or copied to an i7 desktop processed and re-uploaded showed the bottleneck was the overhead of the calls then the action.

      Amazon had the API to do something like this on the fly without having the OS read the file first then copy.

    41. Re:FTFY by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      Those that do may not know not to use it. Microsoft is using their monopoly power to basically hide these issues from businesses which are the major users of that platform.

      And it is a politics, albeit one that really matters to the health of the industry, and businesses will just want to stay out of them.

      That makes the abstinence argument putrid shit.

      The community needs to scream wildly about this stuff.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    42. Re:FTFY by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      In a general sense he's right. Microsoft lost it in certain markets. Server and cloud is dominated by linux. Microsoft Windows is a desktop product.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    43. Re:FTFY by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      You don't need to sell it like that. You can go with any number of non Microsoft cloud servers for testing or otherwise and you'll get billed and a better product for less.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    44. Re:FTFY by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Reality is flamebait, even when you're just making an observation. However I was hungover, so I may have been abrasive and maybe people take that personally.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    45. Re:FTFY by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      A lot of government agencies still run NTLM and SMB1. Try to turn it off and the Windows guys go nuts. Nothing will work they say. It'll break all kinds of stuff. Gloom and doom!

      Sometimes they get flip and say to disable FIPS, there are better protocols out there. Yes, that Microsoft DOESN'T support. They barely support the FIPS standard as it is.

  3. Cannoical? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hruh? Hu hon de Cannoical Linuces

  4. Obligatory by rrohbeck · · Score: 2, Insightful

    1. Embrace
    2. Extend

    --
    thegodmovie.com - watch it
    1. Re:Obligatory by Z80a · · Score: 4, Funny

      2.5. Fill with ads

    2. Re:Obligatory by VeryFluffyBunny · · Score: 0

      =))) Wish I had mod points.

      --
      Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
    3. Re:Obligatory by TeachingMachines · · Score: 1, Informative

      3. Extinguish
      (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish)

      --

      The Death Penalty: Killing people to show others that killing people is wrong.
    4. Re:Obligatory by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Yes. And a year ago, when I first heard about Miscreant-o-soft having anything to do with Linux, I told people they would try to annex and subvert Linux -- because they want a Microsoft-only computing world -- and I was scoffed at and ridiculed, told that it would never happen. Are you all scoffing at me now? I was told the GNU license would prevent it. Guess what? That's just a piece of paper, it means NOTHING when you have a whole room full of high-priced lawyers working for you. Microsoft will eventually own Linux entirely, one way or another, and make sure computing platforms lock out anything independent anyone else writes. Not sure what, if anything, can stop this from happening.

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

      Reboot.

  5. Which part is this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which part of embrace, extend, and extinguish is this?

    I'm assuming we're well past the "embrace" part, considering they've got a bash shell for Windows 10. I guess that means we're onto the extend part. What proprietary bits does this kernel contain that can't be found anywhere else?

  6. EEE by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Embrace,. Check.

    Extend. Check.

    Will give you three guesses for what comes next.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:EEE by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Narf?

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re:EEE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure this is a trick question. It should be:

      1. Embrace and Extend.
      2. ???
      3. Profit

      And I'm pretty sure that today's Microsoft couldn't figure out how to Extinguish a candle with a bucket of water.

    3. Re:EEE by NateLee · · Score: 1

      Makes a noise like a Dalek? :D

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

      Ejaculate?

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

      Erection comes first bro!

    6. Re:EEE by neilo_1701D · · Score: 1

      Embrace,. Check.

      Extend. Check.

      Will give you three guesses for what comes next.

      $$$$$$$$$

    7. Re:EEE by argumentsockpuppet · · Score: 1

      Pinky and the Brain? For a minute, I thought you meant Yarp.

    8. Re:EEE by bobstreo · · Score: 2

      Embrace,. Check.

      Extend. Check.

      Will give you three guesses for what comes next.

      Debian or CentOS on some other cloud?

    9. Re:EEE by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      Microsoft changing their game plan now that Balmer is gone?

    10. Re:EEE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can't take Linux from us. That's the point of open source.

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

      I wish it did :(

    12. Re:EEE by myrdos2 · · Score: 1

      Embrace,. Check.
      Extend. Check.

      Will give you three guesses for what comes next.

      1) Fork a desktop and screw around with the start menu and GUI, causing adoption to tank.

      2) Change the kernel version to 10 and try to give it away for free.

      3) Say "screw it" and load it up with ads and spyware.

      ... I need more guesses!

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

      We switch back to grass roots linux/BSD? Fine by me. Ubuntu, Fedora and other systemd shit sucks ass.

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

      They can't take Linux from us. That's the point of open source.

      You mean like Redhat did not force systemd upon us?

    15. Re:EEE by TrekkieGod · · Score: 2

      We're already at "spew conspiracy theories."

      Yes, I remember the Microsoft of the 1990s. However, Microsoft has been Open Source friendly for a far longer time than the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish tactics of the past. Anybody still freaking out about them is actually being counter-productivity, by not giving credit to companies who actually did become better.

      People like you were the ones sounding the horn when Microsoft created the .Net framework over a decade ago as an open standard and were screaming that they didn't want Mono in Linux because they were just about to sue everyone for patent infringement. Microsoft responded by publishing a covenant not to sue, and that the patents would be used defensively opened. Then people like you screamed that this covenant was not legally binding, because they were ignorant of the concept of estoppel, I guess. Did any of your fears come to pass?

      Yes, Microsoft just extended the Linux kernel. To operate with a Microsoft service, affecting absolutely nobody else. That adds no additional features other than improved performance in their cloud service. We're supposed to all be freaking out that they're planning on destroying Linux when they're doing something that makes using Linux better in their cloud environment so they can better compete with the same service on Amazon EC2? Please. We're supposed to be afraid of extensions to a GPLv2 project that is necessarily open source as a result of the kernel license? Are you insane, what exactly is the mechanism for "extinguish" here? It's not like they can lock up any of the cool stuff they added, if people think it's valuable, they can get what they like and merge it to the mainstream kernel, Microsoft can't stop them. This is no different than a variety of custom kernel options that ubuntu offers, which already included one that's specialized for virtual machines.

      This isn't 1999, and Canonical isn't SCO. Microsoft has been acting like a trustworthy company for a very long time, and contributed a good deal to various open source projects. Get over the evils of the past and reward a company for making a fantastic turnaround. Yes, it's true, they didn't do it to be nice, but because they don't have the same monopoly position they used to: nevertheless, they could have died off, but instead maintained relevance in the industry by working well with others. That's a good thing.

      --

      Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

    16. Re:EEE by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
      I will never forgive microsoft for deliberately introducing white spaces in path names. There was already a well established convention about white spaces. They knew it,. They deliberately did it to break all the scripts in linux/unix. My scripts broke. Even now I hate the stupid "Program Files (x86)" and options like /build "Release|x64".

      What Microsoft bleeds into rest of the environment. When it had the marketshare it kept releasing uncertainity storms repeatedly and we were forced to react and put up with and adapt to it. And every time I fixed my scripts once again I could imagine a bunch of jerks in Redmond laughing at me. They showed no respect for us. They can expect no mercy from us. I will go to ends of earth to bad mouth Microsoft at every opportunity.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    17. Re:EEE by AlejandroTejadaC · · Score: 1

      When I read about this, the first idea that struck my head was: 1) Is Microsoft creating a Linux version that runs natively ALL programs that currently runs in Windows OS? or... 2) Is Microsoft Windows ready to offer the choice of running Linux in parallel along their main OS, or the possibility of install and run natively (within Windows) every Linux program...

    18. Re:EEE by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      Extinguish Windows Server.

      Come on, can't everyone see that train coming down the tracks?

    19. Re:EEE by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      I will never forgive microsoft for deliberately introducing white spaces in path names. There was already a well established convention about white spaces. They knew it,. They deliberately did it to break all the scripts in linux/unix. My scripts broke. Even now I hate the stupid "Program Files (x86)" and options like /build "Release|x64".

      What Microsoft bleeds into rest of the environment. When it had the marketshare it kept releasing uncertainity storms repeatedly and we were forced to react and put up with and adapt to it. And every time I fixed my scripts once again I could imagine a bunch of jerks in Redmond laughing at me. They showed no respect for us. They can expect no mercy from us. I will go to ends of earth to bad mouth Microsoft at every opportunity.

      Actually, it's why Microsoft put white spaces in filenames. Because back in the way when everything was 8.3, no one cared (because you couldn't have a space in a filename). But with long filename support, you could, and Microsoft needed a way to break what would become a common problem later on.

      So boo-hoo. Just because most Linux/Unix users don't have spaces in paths, doesn't mean you won't ever encounter one. Best that Microsoft forced you to quote your parameters and thus add support and robustness to your script that try to deal with someone who puts spaces and dashes in filenames.

      It's also why some scripts end up doing the equivalent of "rm -rf /" - they aren't robust enough to handle odd, but perfectly legal cases

  7. sepingll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Teh splleing si mxied pu.

  8. Custom Linux Kernel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and no back doors. We promise!

    1. Re:Custom Linux Kernel by Stephen+Battleware · · Score: 0

      It's well known the NSA approached Torvalds with an offer so good he couldn't refuse. Funny thing though, ever since, he nods up and down when he say's 'No'.

    2. Re:Custom Linux Kernel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the one time he did that, as a joke? The whole "nod while saying no" thing wouldn't fly if it weren't a joke.

    3. Re:Custom Linux Kernel by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      And then there was systemd

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    4. Re: Custom Linux Kernel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh look, it's the usual idiot troll out lurking again.

    5. Re: Custom Linux Kernel by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Oh Sweetie, look at you trying to quell the doubt in your mind. The possibility you can't deny.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  9. MuckUsoft Winux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MuckUsoft Winux.. it sucks.
    s3

  10. It's a trap... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get an axe!

  11. We know. It's called Ubuntu. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    F*** that distro.

  12. Close releationships? by aglider · · Score: 2

    Microsoft and Canonical's relationship is getting closer besides Ubuntu for Windows.

    Microsoft to buy Canonical. The end of Ubuntu.

    --
    Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
    1. Re:Close releationships? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just like "Corel Linux"

    2. Re:Close releationships? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good riddance.

  13. Canonical have a custom Ubuntu kernel for AWS too by Sits · · Score: 2

    This isn't the first time that Canonical have produced a custom kernel for a cloud provider platform. Earlier in the year they came out with a custom Ubuntu kernel for the same for AWS so it sounds like strategy they're pursuing in general. Other than the reduced size I'd hope these improvements end up in the mainline kernel in the end (perhaps these changes already have and these are just backports?)...

  14. Careful, Ubuntu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    and always remember what happened to Nokia (just the last in a long, long line).

    If you go to bed with a crocodile, you don't need to wonder why, next morning, your right leg is missing.

  15. So by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    does that count as microkernel?

  16. Re:Canonical have a custom Ubuntu kernel for AWS t by Bert64 · · Score: 4, Informative

    There aren't really any changes so much as reconfiguration...
    A generic kernel needs a complete set of drivers for all the hardware it *might* be installed on, whereas a cloud hypervisor is a fixed target. You can safely remove support for physical devices, and for older processors than those used by the cloud host which results in a smaller better optimized kernel. I've done exactly the same thing, albeit on a smaller scale, as i have 100+ vm images running on the same hypervisor and underlying physical machines.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  17. I'd roll my own kernel too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, one of the first things I did on my first Linux computer was to compile a kernel that was tailored for the hardware.
    Why waste Memory on drivers and features that will never be used in a VM?

    1. Re:I'd roll my own kernel too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not just memory, think about performance improvements. The VM would probably exposes/supports newer "CPU" instruction sets, hardware features, etc, which most likely improves its performance.

  18. Linux app requires Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah, so they want Linux solutions to require Windows.

  19. Is it true what they say... by Sla$hPot · · Score: 0

    ... That the next Windows version will be a Linux distro called WinDux?

  20. Ha ha ha ha by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    For years I've joked about Microsoft coming out with their own version of Linux... and now it has come to pass. Make no mistake- this is the *beginning of the end for pure, unencumbered Linux as we know it.

    Amusingly, this is the "cancer" that Steve Ballmer was alluding to, where Microsoft embraces, extends, and extinguishes stuff. It won't be extinguished though, it'll be polluted with Microsoft's "improvements".

    First it'll be fairly benign...then later it'll start to have "special features" that are MS-specific (that is, "Microsoft ONLY") and from there it'll be a relentless poisoning of Linux, bit by bit.

    You laugh now, but you'll see. I was right all along, and this is just the opening move by Microsoft to fuck up Linux for the foreseeable future.

    Never forget that Microsoft always, always, ALWAYS has its eye on the Long Game. If it takes them 10 or 15 years to pollute, ruin, and fragment Linux, so be it. They have the time and the money, everything else is just detail.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  21. Extend... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    And we all know the Final Phase...

    (Final Solution)

  22. "a MS optimized kernel" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "a MS optimized kernel" -> "an MS-optimized kernel"

  23. Embrace - completed. by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

    Extend - in process. Extinguish - next in line.

  24. Re: Canonical have a custom Ubuntu kernel for AWS by buchanmilne · · Score: 1

    The Ubuntu kernel for AWS also includes the ENA (Elastic Network Adapter) driver (source code: https://github.com/amzn/amzn-d...), which allows you to get 20Gbps networking on certain instance types (https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2016/06/introducing-elastic-network-adapter-ena-the-next-generation-network-interface-for-ec2-instances/).

    I believe RHEL 7.4 also added the ENA driver, and the Amazon Linux image has it of course.

  25. Is it configurable via .config? by nyet · · Score: 1

    Is it configurable by .config in the real linux kernel sources, or is it all unaccepted patches?

  26. What can go wrong ? by stooo · · Score: 1

    MS shipping a specific Linux kernel ?
    What can possibly go wrong ?

    --
    aaaaaaa
  27. Better than systemd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whatever twisted love child these two manage to barf out, I'll take it over systemd any day of the week. It hasn't managed to successfully halt my laptop once since I installed U17.10 a week ago! So bad it's cute and cuddly. Trouble is, I like cute and cuddly. It's fun.

    #Moo

  28. Yet another M$ astroturfer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    M$ astroturfers are one again using sock puppet accounts to shill for M$ and get the $lashdot populace to believe that, as most like astroturfer TrekkieGod have, M$ has changed. After all, $lashdot is now a shill piece for M$. M$ still uses their "embrace, extend, extinguish" tactics despite what trekkiegod would have any of you believe. The only thing M$ has changed was their methods of executing their tactics.

    --
    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
    Friends do assist M$ addicted friends in committing suicide.

  29. embrace extend extinguish by HermMunster · · Score: 1

    Yet another stage of embrace extend extinguish.

    --
    You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
  30. Yes, it already does. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes.

    But this isn't really any news, MS has provided custom canonical distributions for Azure deployment for years, and the image MS already provides as their recommenced/default distribution for azure VMs already contains several telemetry and remote management daemons, to facilitate better integration with Azure. The image is also configured to trust ms' own apt repo source.

    The code for the telemetry daemon is even open source on github.
    https://github.com/Microsoft/OMS-Agent-for-Linux

    There has been a few bugs in these daemons, most significant is the bug which starts shell scripts which doesn't terminate, i.e. the server becomes super slow after a few days due to thousands of running processes. Google on "OMSConsistencyInvoker".

  31. Yes, it already does! by someboy43 · · Score: 1

    Yes.

    But this isn't really any news, MS has provided custom canonical distributions for Azure deployment for years, and the image MS already provides as their recommenced/default distribution for azure VMs already contains several telemetry and remote management daemons, to facilitate better integration with Azure monitoring. The image is also configured to trust ms' own apt repo source.

    The code for the telemetry daemon is even open source on github.
    https://github.com/Microsoft/O...

    There has been a few bugs in these daemons, most significant is the bug which starts shell scripts which doesn't terminate, i.e. the server becomes super slow after a few days due to thousands of running processes. Google on "OMSConsistencyInvoker".

  32. Ubuntu AWS and Azure patches by Sits · · Score: 1

    You can actually see the lists of changes in the Ubuntu kernel git repos:

    The changes range from configuring things off for hardware that will never exist on that platform, forcing certain options to speed up things like boot times, additional new drivers that aren't (yet) upstream (in one case the driver added was actually rejected by the mainline kernel maintainers and was pulled out of the Ubuntu tree later), backports of tweaks that were made in later kernels that help that platform etc.

    One downside is that this makes a bit more likely that people running on cloud platforms could see different problems to "bare metal" setups (and vice versa) thus splintering the test effort a bit and increasing Canonical's maintenance burden. Also porting a VM with optimized kernel means you have to remember to switch kernel package (but if you know what you're doing then injecting packages into an offline VM is easy). I guess the benefits outweigh the costs...