Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Should We Worry Microsoft Will 'Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish' Linux? (betanews.com)
BrianFagioli writes: While there is no proof that anything nefarious is afoot, it does feel like maybe the Windows-maker is hijacking the Linux movement a bit by serving distros in its store. I hope there is no "embrace, extend, and extinguish" shenanigans going on.
Just yesterday, we reported that Kali Linux was in the Microsoft Store for Windows 10. That was big news, but it was not particularly significant in the grand scheme, as Kali is not very well known. Today, there is some undeniably huge news -- Debian is joining SUSE, Ubuntu, and Kali in the Microsoft Store. Should the Linux community be worried?
My concern lately is that Microsoft could eventually try to make the concept of running a Linux distro natively a thing of the past. Whether or not that is the company's intention is unknown. The Windows maker gives no reason to suspect evil plans, other than past negative comments about Linux and open source. For instance, former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer once called Linux "cancer" -- seriously.
Just yesterday, we reported that Kali Linux was in the Microsoft Store for Windows 10. That was big news, but it was not particularly significant in the grand scheme, as Kali is not very well known. Today, there is some undeniably huge news -- Debian is joining SUSE, Ubuntu, and Kali in the Microsoft Store. Should the Linux community be worried?
My concern lately is that Microsoft could eventually try to make the concept of running a Linux distro natively a thing of the past. Whether or not that is the company's intention is unknown. The Windows maker gives no reason to suspect evil plans, other than past negative comments about Linux and open source. For instance, former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer once called Linux "cancer" -- seriously.
Linux is way too fucking big and popular to be squashed. It isn't just used by the unwashed IT professional, but too many corporations depend on it for Microsoft to be able to hurt the project.
Well, I mean, they have a track record of doing both of those things. So no, they can't really escape distrust and cynicism no matter what they do. Their only out is to slowly regain trust - which I think they are doing. But they dug their hole - don't feel bad that they need to work hard to scratch back out.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Microsoft once (and from their perspective quite accurately) described Linux as a cancer, eating their business. Now as a last resort, they may try to embrace the cancer. Don't think that works as a long term strategy.
"He took a duck in the face at 250 knots." -- William Gibson, Pattern Recognition
In order for the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish to happen, Microsoft would have to release a version of Linux that then gets used by most existing Linux users, enough that other distributions then give up, then Microsoft does as well.
In contrast, adding Linux to windows as an "app" is not going to do anything to the existing Linux user base.
So to answer the question...No, we do not need to worry about Microsoft damaging the future of Linux.
I can't imagine a lot of Linux users migrating to Windows just because of the Windows Subsystem for Linux. The main reason Microsoft is interested in supporting Linux is because of Azure and they quickly realized that Docker was going to leave them in the dust if they didn't provide something caparable. Since it would've taken way too long for them to create their own solution, they developed compatibility with Docker to facilitate running Linux processes on Windows. I would be more concerned about Microsoft making changes to Docker containers or the image format that only worked on Windows than any tricks they might use to co-opt Linux itself.
Overall, I just don't see Linux users migrating to Windows anytime soon, especially developers, because they already have a superior experience using Linux. I constantly have coworkers convincing me that I should migrate to Windows because then I could have the "best of both worlds" but I think they have that backwards. Linux is a superior host environment for me because of the following reasons:
- It doesn't install updates without my permission
- Updates don't change my configuration values out from under me
- Updates almost never break my system
- It doesn't install or remove apps without my permission
- It has superior window management
- It doesn't constantly need to be rebooted anytime the OS or even an app is updated
- Many development tools and runtime environments run much faster in Linux
- Many distributions don't require spying on me
There are many more reasons that I don't have time to elaborate but I just don't see this providing a good opportunity for Microsoft to ensnare Linux users, developers, or APIs. If anything, I see this as an opportunity for people to learn the value of Linux and eventually migrate away from Windows.
This is why Linux is seen as elitist -- You do things differently than me? Well, that's stupid you should just do it the way I want you too.
> I don't see how any one group or company could even have any significant influence on Linux
You don't? Really? Maybe you should move out of your cave.
Redhat took control of Linux years ago. In the enterprise space it's all Potteringware. That is entirely because of Redhat and their partner Microsoft.
Sure there are a few distros that the enterprise will not go near: like Slackware and Gentoo. But in government, and industry, all Linux marches to Redhat's beat.