Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Open Source Tool Lets You 'Bring Your Own Linux' To Windows (microsoft.com)

Long-time Slashdot reader Billly Gates writes: Debian is now available in the Windows app store. It joins Ubuntu, Suse Leap, SuSe enterprise, and Kali Linux for those who cannot or do not want to bother with a virtual machine or a full install of the OS. However, it included stable 9.3. 9.4 is available from the repository if you run apt-get update and apt-get upgrade.
"Fedora is not yet available, although Microsoft has stated openly that it is working to make it so," reports Computer Weekly. And there's more: Microsoft has also provided an open source tool called Microsoft WSL/DistroLauncher for users who want to build their own Linux package where a particular distribution is either a) not available yet or b) is available, but the user wants to apply a greater degree of customisation to it than comes as standard.

135 comments

  1. Well Linux is over by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    What next?

    TempleOS anyone? /ducks

    1. Re: Well Linux is over by saloomy · · Score: 2

      Hah. Let me know when I can

      yum install ms-windows-x86_64

      It would be nice if your could do it backwards.

    2. Re:Well Linux is over by NerdENerd · · Score: 1

      I had never heard of TempleOS so I Googled it. I have just spent the last 2 hours watching videos on Terry Davis. Wow. What a character.

    3. Re: Well Linux is over by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hah. Let me know when I can

      yum install ms-windows-x86_64

      It would be nice if your could do it backwards.

      And your point is exactly?

      Run Windows for Steam games ONLY. Everything else is Linux or FreeBSD.

      In today's world Windows is irrelevant. For fucks sake, even in their Office360 (online) they STILL cannot build a decent WYSYWIG editor that can even compete vs any open source version. A good example of this is how they wrap every sentence it's own TABLE cell.

      The 90's called. They want their crappy, bloated, and security mess of an OS back.

    4. Re:Well Linux is over by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      hahaha! yes same thing happened to me a while back, I had heard of it but never paid any attention until some friends of mine showed me one of his youtube videos. Man its a scary world out there. lol

  2. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you cant beat them join them
    Finally the year of the linux desktop
    Does bashGL work?

  3. Add Slackware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Add Slackware to the list of supported Linux distributions.

    http://www.slackware.com/

  4. Slowly letting users get used to linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slowly letting users get used to linux.
    so Windows will become a linuxdistro or they are dropping the windows OS for the cloud

    1. Re:Slowly letting users get used to linux by gweihir · · Score: 1, Informative

      I don't think they would survive that long-term. But, MS being fundamentally incompetent and clueless, they may not realize that. So you definitely have a point.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:Slowly letting users get used to linux by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The WSL is more for people who want Windows as a primary OS but would like a few random Linux goodies and tools. Cigwin and the like work too. But they haven’t been kept up to date at the same level as a popular Linux distribution.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:Slowly letting users get used to linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is true, but I really don't know where Microsoft's strategy for Windows is really going. PC sales are slowing, and they gave away Windows 10 to most people who were upgrading. I think they, like Apple, are moving towards a world where they might provide a desktop-OS but don't use it for their primary revenue stream. They want people using Office and Azure, maybe some day we will actually get Office for Linux.

      Since the recent reorganization, there is no independent Windows division of the company at all.

    4. Re:Slowly letting users get used to linux by Creepy · · Score: 1

      Ah, but you missed the point of giving away the OS - Microsoft saw how the Apple's App Store and iTunes became the focus of Apple's growth strategy; by taking a large cut from store sales, it became more important to get the store into people's hands and building store access into the OSes. Microsoft is trying to duplicate that strategy. This is why Windows 10 was given away for free - get Windows 7 (or even XP) users to upgrade to 10 and have that store button right on the task bar. Windows 8 and 8.1 already had it, but users were reluctant to upgrade due to the tablet focus.

  5. I sure hope telemerty works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    from inside the Linux systems too! Its that main reason I picked Windows in the first place!

  6. Linux with added spyware by Alain+Williams · · Score: 4, Insightful

    sorry, I should have said 'Telemetry' !

    I wonder if this was at the behest of the NSA who were worried about spy-ware free Linux boxen; this lets the keep tabs on more people.

    1. Re:Linux with added spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows Server 2019 will be the better desktop variant? If you can get a student or MSDN version or pay $800 for it.

    2. Re:Linux with added spyware by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Basically the only reason I see for Windows to "integrate Linux" is the fascist fuckups in the NSA fearing the cannot listen to everything anymore, like the perverted creeps they are. MS itself certainly can only lose here. Would be interesting to know what kind of extreme pressure was brought on them to make them do this.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    3. Re:Linux with added spyware by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      Spending time & effort to find a way to run Linux distros inside Windows is like struggling to find a way to mount an Abrams tank on top of a Mini-Cooper.

      What's the point outside of a few edge-cases where it may possibly be helpful/convenient?

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    4. Re:Linux with added spyware by Gavagai80 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      MS can't possibly lose from being able to say their product can do everything their competitors can, including running those competitors for free. The "best of both worlds, no risk" argument is just what business wants to hear. And any home user who bothers to figure out WSL is someone who was likely to have tried dual-booting anyway so they can only gain there too.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    5. Re:Linux with added spyware by mcswell · · Score: 1

      As someone who has been using the Linux-in-Windows for a year or more, perhaps I can answer your question. I do all my software development using the Linux sub-system: Python, finite state transducers, as well as TeX stuff. I could perhaps install Linux instead of Windows; the main reason I don't is that for nearly 30 years I've been using a keyboard remapper that is (afaict) unavailable in vanilla Linux. I've tried various Linux key mapping programs, and none does what my program does in Windows. Needless to say, my fingers are very used to this way of working.

      I'm probably the only person in the world who has that particular reason for using Windows, but there are apparently lots of people who prefer Windows for every day things, but Linux for software development.

    6. Re:Linux with added spyware by Excelcia · · Score: 1

      Interestingly, I already use Linux in Windows for some of the things I no longer trust Windows for. Just not Microsoft's version of Linux, of course, because I will never trust that. I use VirtualBox.

      Of course, any VM running in Windows is just as vulnerable as any other piece of software, but it's an extra layer of difficulty. My VirtualBox VM's filesystem is encrypted, so a random piece of Windows malware can't just read its files indiscriminately, and any malware (and by that I mean software antagonistic to my best interests, including the OS) reading the VM's memory has an extra layer of data structures to have to parse to get at any juicy data in RAM. It adds a layer between the OS and important software like KeePass. A layer that automated malware tools are unlikely to have been designed to search through, which is another reason not to use Microsoft's solutions.

      Microsoft's Linux offerings are a solution looking for a problem. Nothing that you distrust Windows for can be trusted to them. There are other solutions that have been around longer and are better understood. I think I'll stick to what I know, thank-you.

    7. Re:Linux with added spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      including running those competitors for free

      Except it's not free. Windows 10 Home costs $120 and Pro costs $200. On top of that you have to pay with your electricity, bandwidth, privacy and mental well-being with all of the adware, spyware, forbidden options and constantly fighting against your OS.

      Linux + Wine + PlayOnLinux is $0 and no stress.

    8. Re:Linux with added spyware by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Linux distros inside Windows is like struggling to find a way to mount an Abrams tank on top of a Mini-Cooper.

      Except they aren't running Linux or even components of it. They are running a few GNU userland tools. More like mounting the gun from an Abrams tank on a Mini-Cooper to end up with something that is small but still useful if someone is trying to carjack you. *

      Probably the worst car analogy on Slashdot in a while. :-)

    9. Re:Linux with added spyware by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      The Linux part is free, because Microsoft wasn't going to lower the price of Windows if they didn't include WSL. It's improving their value for money proposition from where it was before.

      I've been using exclusively Linux of 15 years now, but the existence of WSL certainly increases the chances of me using Windows someday. How could it not?

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    10. Re:Linux with added spyware by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      Because if you have used Linux for so long, you obviously had some issue with windows, and that issue will still be there when you install windows to test WSL, and most likely before you even get to installing WSL you will have formatted that NTFS partition back to ext.

  7. It's a trap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Tux is on the menu at microsoft!

  8. On Windows? by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2

    Eh... I'll wait for the Linux port. ;)

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:On Windows? by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      this deserves a "Yo Dawg" meme
      https://i.imgur.com/MVqLdQF.pn...

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    2. Re:On Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this deserves a "Yo Dawg" meme

        https://i.imgur.com/MVqLdQF.pn...

      Just another excuse to reference níggers eh?

  9. Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by rea1l1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'd really appreciate the ability to switch between OSes like I can virtual desktops. Modern hardware certainly supports this potential.

    I hope someone within the Linux community returns with a competing feature, enabling a seamless OS transition, founded upon Linux, an OS that doesn't invade your privacy, while eventually providing additional sand boxing & integration features around Windows, locking it into it's own little garden.

    Could an authentic Microsoft Windows installation be forced into becoming a mere compatibility layer built on top of Linux?

    The best of both worlds: Windows compatibility coupled with Linux security.

    1. Re:Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You mean like WINE? ;)

      https://www.winehq.org/

    2. Re:Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wine was not... very satisfying but now you can run the newer Stable version (use a ppa if on ubuntu) which was first 2.0.x, then 3.0.x, with huge improvements above whatever Wine was a couple years ago. You can choose to run some "devel" versions instead but I have to stress, unless you want to run GTA 5 or something, how good it is (e.g. you can run some well known trader app)

    3. Re:Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PS : I'm talking of the out of the box experience without going into control panels, using "winetricks", or using that playonlinux thing that I didn't even understand how to use, or going out of your way to use some "staging" or svn or whatever version, or "wine bottles" which are whatever they are. Have no patience for that? Wine stable might be enough just running wine foo.exe or double-clicking foo.exe. At least for modest needs where you don"t give a shit about some random crapware made in 2017 or games that need a 20,000 MHz CPU, 2TB of RAM and 16TB of disk with a 56 trillion transistor GPU.

    4. Re:Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've suggested something that has existed for a long time. It's called a hypervisor and many exist and are well known such as Virtualbox and vmware. There probably are fully FOSS ones too but I'm not as well versed.

      There'll never be a product that truly allows you to switch the OS on the fly at will. There cannot be at least not without redefining our typical hardware concept of a PC. An OS by definition is the "operating system" and there can be one. You could certainly have a hypervisor built into the OS but a hypervisor cannot be the OS itself.

    5. Re:Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by ITRambo · · Score: 1

      Using two computers, one running Linux and the other Windows, and a KVM switch might be the simplest way to do what you want. Use a NAS to share files and you're pretty much covered.

    6. Re:Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by maestroX · · Score: 1

      Unlikely. It has been tried in the past numerous times (OS/2 et al), eventually OS vendors want to exclusively tie the end user to its platform.
      Any case of adapting will be a transitioning state.

    7. Re:Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

      There probably are fully FOSS ones too but I'm not as well versed.

      Xen

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    8. Re:Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only *nix have virtual desktops (incl. Mac). Windows doesn't. I do remember when NVIDIA drivers let you sort of half ass do it but still.

      Windows is dead.

    9. Re:Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did that in the late 90's, but that was 20 years ago. Needing four systems, two computers, one KVM, and a NAS when a type 1 hypervisor on one computer could do the job is obsolete.

    10. Re:Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      I'd really appreciate the ability to switch between OSes like I can virtual desktops. Modern hardware certainly supports this potential.

      There'll never be a product that truly allows you to switch the OS on the fly at will. There cannot be at least not without redefining our typical hardware concept of a PC. An OS by definition is the "operating system" and there can be one. You could certainly have a hypervisor built into the OS but a hypervisor cannot be the OS itself.

      What they're asking for is to be able to run multiple operating systems and switch between them. This functionality already exists, and the technology which makes it work as the user expects is GPU Virtualization. AFAIK you need to use real VMware and not just player or workstation to use it, but I'm not actually sure about that. This lets multiple VMs share the GPU without hacky translation layers. Obviously, you need another OS underneath your operating systems; as you say, we call this a hypervisor. You also need a "professional" video card; can't just use a GEforce, because nVidia locks that functionality down to Quadro or maybe even only GRID cards.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re: Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by cyber-vandal · · Score: 2

      Windows 10 has virtual desktops

    12. Re:Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PlayOnLinux is actually easier if you want to use wine version that doesn't come with your distro. For example there is certain version of wine that was patched by community but the upstream refused to accept the patch, it helps me to run some games without some annoying bugs. Yeah you can do that by compiling (+patched) yourself, but PoL just makes it easier (you can just use it), and this is without using PPA.

    13. Re:Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That kind of thing can also be done with KVM + VGA passthrough, although you need VT-d technology (or the AMD equivalent I suppose). You don't have to worry about the Nvidia nasty stuff, because KVM already took care of it.

      I wonder why the parent's post was downvoted.

    14. Re:Missing Linux Feature: Seamless OS Crossing by orin · · Score: 1

      This is possible. You create a second virtual desktop in Windows 10. You run VcXsrv full screen on that desktop, start your Windows Subsystem for Linux distro, configure display for 0.0, start your Linux desktop binaries and then run the Linux desktop there. You can then switch back to the Windows 10 desktop on the first virtual desktop.

  10. oh bother by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for those who cannot or do not want to bother with a virtual machine or a full install of the OS.

    Tweaking the injected narrative the sentiment might read "for those who do not want the configuration expense and performance penalty of a virtual machine or the increased memory space and threat surface penalty of a full install of the OS."

    the user wants to apply a greater degree of customisation to it than comes as standard.

    Good idea. Mainstream distros have been ego-land for way too long.

  11. The Only "Bring Your Own Linux" Tool You Need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A flash drive.

  12. Permissions? by BronsCon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Have they fixed permissions mapping when accessing files on the Windows partition yet? If so, I'm excited for the update, because it's an issue I deal with daily.

    Their excuse is that they don't want to change Windows ACLs, and that's fine, I get that, but it's a poor excuse; WSL applies 0777 to all Windows files currently and, to add to it, doesn't seem to use Windows ACLs for the files within the lxss directory, which strongly implies that they're already storing Linux file permissions as metadata elsewhere, which is what they should be doing for Linux file permissions for Windows files -- defaulting to values mapped from Windows ACLs, of course.

    --
    APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    1. Re:Permissions? by whizzter · · Score: 1

      Don't think so. You should ping rich turner and ask since he's been helpful, there's also an github+"uservoice" thing where you can post these issues.

    2. Re:Permissions? by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      The issue has been discussed at length on Github and MS has voiced that they have no interest in doing anything about it. Where do you think I read Microsoft's "excuse" for not fixing it?

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    3. Re:Permissions? by BronsCon · · Score: 2

      No more than Microsoft's response makes them come off as a bunch of assholes, but okay Yours makes you seem like a swell guy, though.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    4. Re: Permissions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to the new world. Where telling the truTh makes you a dick. Isn't it swell?

    5. Re:Permissions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      great article on this:

      https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/wsl/2016/06/15/wsl-file-system-support/

      windows mapped drives are using the ACLs granted to your windows user access token when launching the shell.

      linux permissions are stored as NTFS metadata which is why you shouldn't mess with the lxss directory using explorer.

    6. Re:Permissions? by BronsCon · · Score: 2

      windows mapped drives are using the ACLs granted to your windows user access token when launching the shell

      Indeed they are, as you're still technically signed in as your Windows user, so you can only access what your Windows user can access, regardless of how you're accessing it. WSL still shows permissions of 0777 for all Windows mapped drives and all files and directories contained therein, regardless of your actual permissions. I'm not guessing at this; as I said, this is an issue I deal with on a daily basis. I can chmod those files all day long and the operation will appear to succeed, but when I list them they're all still 0777, regardless of the permissions I set or the permissions granted by Windows ACLs.

      That is the problem, and it's a big one considering that Git stores whether a given file is user executable or not. Semi-fortunately, Git has a configuration option that tells it to ignore that and either make any new files executable or not executable (based on the configured value), but that does make it a bit difficult to add a new file with an executable status other than the configured default. Yes, I know about "git update-index", but I work on a multitude of different systems, only one of which is WSL, and it's honestly a massive pain in my ass to have to remember to do that if I happen to be adding a new executable to a repo while I'm on that system.

      If you look at the number of people complaining about this on Github, I'm far from the only person who thinks they should, at the very least, default the Linux permissions that are displayed to something that reflects the Windows ACLs that are applied. Windows ACLs include "Read & execute", so doing this would allow me to solve my problem natively.

      To clarify, a file for which my Windows user has no permissions, e.g. I can not open, edit, write, execute, or delete that file, appears in WSL to have full permissions -- 0777. That, again, is the problem. Attempting to access the file, of course, will fail in that case, but you don't know it will fail until you try it.

      And things that shouldn't be executable are executable in Windows mapped drives in under WSL, because they all appear to have a permissions mask of 0777; if your Windows user can read it, your WSL user will happily execute it. Really not good if the file in question happens to be a potentially malicious binary or BASH script you copied off one of your servers or other systems for analysis (in which case, best practices dictate you "chmod -x" that sunuvabitch so you don't accidentally execute it). Whoops, can't do that in WSL if the file happens to reside on a Windows mapped drive. Again, that's the problem.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    7. Re:Permissions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see your concern but wouldn't this require some method of UID/GID mapping to the windows user for it to work properly? And there would have to be further distillation as the NTFS ACLs are more granular than Linux permissions (though doesn't SELinux allow ACLs?)

      Basically this would require some translation layer/shim that doesn't currently exist today.

      I'm guessing what they did to avoid some half-baked solution was to set everything to 777. The correct way to do this would require UID/GID mapping (remember your Linux password does not have to match your Windows password). I don't think this can be done well natively today.

    8. Re:Permissions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a follow up to my comment. on OS X, a Samba share is mounted similarly under /Volumes/My_Mounted_Share; all files & directories are marked with mode 700 with UID of me & GID of the group 'staff'..... looking at it this way it seems no different.

    9. Re:Permissions? by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      I see your concern but wouldn't this require some method of UID/GID mapping to the windows user for it to work properly?

      They "set" everything to 0777 without mapping users or groups, why would they need to map them to display your effective permissions? Everything in the Windows mapped drives is owned by root anyway, so no, no user or group mapping is necessary. Just display what the current ACLs will allow my user to do.

      And there would have to be further distillation as the NTFS ACLs are more granular than Linux permissions (though doesn't SELinux allow ACLs?)

      Do the current ACLs allow my Windows user to execute this file? Set the execute bit accordingly. Do they allow my Windows user to read this file? Set the read bit accordingly. Do they allow my Windows user to write this file? Set the write bit accordingly. That's all the granularity that is needed if those permissions are read-only, and that would solve the problems faced but the vast majority of users complaining about this. I agree, some distillation would be necessary if we were asking that these permissions be made read/write, but the vast majority of us are just asking that they simply reflect the actual permissions we have for a given file.

      I'm guessing what they did to avoid some half-baked solution was to set everything to 777.

      So they didn't bake it at all?

      The correct way to do this would require UID/GID mapping

      Why? You can't sign in to WSL without first signing in to Windows. You don't actually get 0777 permissions on everything (now that would be super-bad), Windows ACLs still apply. How do they do that? Simply, you're signed in as your Windows user and, to Windows, your Linux user appears to be your Windows user and will inherit the same permissions.

      The "Why?" above was rhetorical. There is no why, because it wouldn't be necessary. Everything in Windows mapped drives is owned by root and nobody is asking for that to change, so there's nothing at all to map there. I could have a dozen Linux users and every single one of them would share the permissions of the currently-signed-in Windows user when accessing Windows mapped drives, so there's nothing at all to map there. This is a solved issue for removable media in Linux, and that's effectively what Windows mapped drives are; the solution is very much what the WSL userbase has been clamoring for: display the effective permissions.

      I don't think this can be done well natively today.

      Doesn't need to be.

      on OS X, a Samba share is mounted similarly under /Volumes/My_Mounted_Share; all files & directories are marked with mode 700 with UID of me & GID of the group 'staff'.....

      The difference is that one is a local resource being accessed via a local driver you can reasonably be sure the version and capabilities of and the other is a network resource being accessed via a remote driver or server where you cannot.

      Let's tackle the version and capabilities part of that difference, first. Samba doesn't provide permissions info along with a directory listing (I believe NFS does, but I'm not super familiar with it so I may be wrong), so you would have to request permissions on each file individually; not every Samba server even implements that functionality, so displaying "dummy" permissions makes sense in that situation. WSL only maps local drives, connected to (and mounted on) the same host in which it is running, and the version of WSL and the DrvFs driver are tied to the Windows release; neither can be installed or upgraded separately by the user. There is no reason DrvFs can't supply permissions info along with filename, size, ctime, atime, and mtime. The DrvFs access is done as the current Windows user, which means the DrvFs driver necessarily knows those permissions in advance.

      Now, let's tackle local vs network

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
  13. Open source is cancer. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

    That is what Microsoft said. Looks like the cancer has metastasized and spread to the brain!

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re: Open source is cancer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thatâ(TM)s what Ballmer said. It does look like a different company under Nadella

    2. Re:Open source is cancer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

      captcha: fooled.

  14. Finally... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Linux is a Windows appilcation.

  15. Not everything is a conspiracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's highly improbable that Microsoft's target here is anyone who would otherwise want to use Linux exclusively. Can you imagine anyone from this site who uses Linux suddenly saying, "Well, I guess I'll install Windows now?"

    Microsoft is likely targeting enterprise users who run Windows but need access to Linux.

    1. Re:Not everything is a conspiracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mac OS X somewhat did this from day one. Not linux but some Unix-like you can use for ps, grep, etc.

      I wanted to do something similar with Windows 7 : install SFU / Interix / SUA (various names for successive versions of Windows NT POSIX layer) but this wasn't available on Windows 7 Pro or Enterprise, only Ultimate (???)
      I should have installed warez Windows 7 Ultimate, but I was pissed off. BTW I just learned that running DOS games on Windows 7 32bit is possible if you force install a Windows XP graphics driver (just running in Classic mode GUI wasn't enough). So I could have run Windows 7 32bit Ultimate with SUA and forced XP graphics driver. Yes running Virtualbox and Dosbox suck ball in comparison, at least on the PC with "only" a dual core CPU and 2GB RAM I had.

    2. Re: Not everything is a conspiracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OSX is Unix, so it's be kinda odd for basic CLI *nix tools to be stripped out.

    3. Re:Not everything is a conspiracy by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Well count me in. My home laptop which I had Linux for years on it. Then I found I was spending most of my time trying to get Windows games to work on it. So I just switched to Windows and I use WSL for some some scripting or bulk data processing.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re: Not everything is a conspiracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I said this very poorly. It's that OS X had a Unix-like command line, instead of not having any command line at all like the previous 80s-like versions of Mac OS. So it drew in the geeks.
      Incidentally you have the whole iOS thing that doesn't even have a command line. So Apple could have stripped or hid the CLI tools altogether, leaving some kind of Applescript or something with the same goal as .vbs or Powershell for admin tasks only.
      There's no cmd.exe on Windows Phone either as far as I know.

      There are very many users, devs and young IT professionals who exclusively run Windows on their desktops and laptops. For Skype and games and... and... ; they tend to be Chrome users too..
      People like this have been running WSL without waiting for that /. story, and may have left Virtualbox or bare metal linux behind.

  16. GERMANY: WE NEED A WALL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump: Yes, yes you do.

  17. Better use of resources... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Write an open source tool to detect dupes.

    1. Re:Better use of resources... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With AI, and, blah.. blah.., and hookers.

      Profit!

  18. If I had to ... by Big+Bipper · · Score: 1

    If I had to ( and I did for work ) I'd run Wndoze in a vm on linux ( I used VirtualBox ), but never the other way round.

    --
    You live and learn, or you don't learn much.
  19. Why? by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 1

    Why would one want to do that? No, seriously.

    1. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For one thing, running debian stable 9 on a 2018 or 2019 laptop wouldn't work very well if at all. Or will you get 1024x768 display, no 3D, no wifi, no suspend, fans permanently at 100%, no brightness control etc.?

      Maybe though you might run Arch Linux instead, launching Virtualbox to run Debian stable or Ubuntu LTS or CentOS etc. in a VM.

  20. Re:Great news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody should be forced to use Linux. This is a great victory for freedom.

    Nobody should be forced to use Windows. This is a great victory for freedom.

    There fixed it for you. :)

  21. Except this is backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I absolutely must run Windows for some reason, I want to run it as a guest OS under a hypervisor with the "on the metal" OS being Linux, not the other way around!

    Linux is somewhat trustworthy to run on the hardware, where Windows is not, and by having Windows as the guest OS I can use Linux facilities to limit and monitor what it is permitted to do.

    1. Re:Except this is backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might firewall Windows externally.. If Windows is untrustworthy on hardware, how can I trust it in a VM anyway? Trouble is, I haven't spent years learning iptables, DNS, etc. to deal with networking Windows in a VM.
      I did connect a Windows running on a laptop to a proxy and saw scary things in the logs. It was mostly crapware, though. You can omit crapware from a hardware Windows installation I think. Best is to not run Windows at all or strictly offline.

  22. Couldn't do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Couldn't spy on you while you used bare Linux , so now they have made a way to spy on Linux through Windows. Suck it up you Windows fools!

  23. And why would I want that? by gweihir · · Score: 2

    Windows is becoming less and less usable and more and more unstable. The only applications left that really need it are MS office (because too many other people use it) and games. I am currently preparing a move of everything besides these two to Linux, because I pretty much have had enough. Spying, always changing GUI, bad features, insecurity, and general stupidity, arrogance and greed. MS really is in rapid decline. They were evil and incompetent before, but now they try very hard to top that. Yes, I am aware "Linux is user friendly, but it is selective about who its friends are", but fortunately I am not one of the masses that have to eat whatever dog-food MS gives them and I am quite capable to run Linux without the MS like atrocity that systemd is.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:And why would I want that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're using it at home, then MS Office and games is perhaps the only reason you might need Windows and you can feel smug about your choice of Linux. If you work in a corporate environment, Windows on the desktop has no serious competition and is still used for a lot of servers, such as exchange servers, file servers, terminal servers, etc. While it's possible to find linux alternatives to these servers, I've yet to see anyone do a convincing implementation in a company of over 1000 users (with Samba being the possible exception).

      That's not forgetting all the horrendous specialist third party finance and medical software that is required by businesses and have no alternatives other than Windows to run on.

      I do feel that Windows is becoming more consumerised by Microsoft and the relentless release of whole new versions of Windows 10 is a huge pain in the neck for large companies, but it's not going anywhere and as long as they keep stopping security patches for older versions/builds of Windows, we are all stuck on that train for the foreseeable future.

    2. Re:And why would I want that? by Harold+Halloway · · Score: 1

      Windows is becoming less and less usable and more and more unstable.

      I'd be interested in seeing the evidence for your assertion.

    3. Re:And why would I want that? by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Me too.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    4. Re: And why would I want that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you kidding?

  24. It's like Wine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's just an emulator for the userland, and since stuff like LVM, ext4, etc. drivers are missing, it really is not any more useful than just running Cygwin in my opinion. If people need a real Linux kernel just run a Virtualbox VM, it's free and a headless Linux VM is very light on resources while being very fast.

    1. Re:It's like Wine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most users don't actually care what kernel is running, those that do are not the target audience.

      Additionally, much like wine, this is not an emulator. They added support for the Linux api, much like wine adds support for the Win32 api. NT is happy to do this, Win32 is the api it normally runs but it has had support for others since the beginning (such as OS/2).

  25. Re:Great news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody should be deprived of their rights to Windows gaming.

  26. WSL-Distribution-Switcher by MSG · · Score: 1

    https://github.com/RoliSoft/WS...

    Just two days ago I set up CentOS on a Windows laptop provided by my employer using WSL-Distribution-Switcher. It'll download and run any distro published as a docker image on Docker Hub.

    Related: What terminal emulator are people using on Windows? I'm using wsl-terminal currently, but I'm curious if there are compelling alternatives.

    https://github.com/goreliu/wsl...

    1. Re:WSL-Distribution-Switcher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is just running any terminal emulator in your WSL distro, displayed by an X11 server on Windows a good solution? Just curious. Like that time I didn't like putty that much, so I ran gnome-terminal launched from putty, which came out with the green on black text and tabs support and same fonts as on the target desktop I was using.

    2. Re:WSL-Distribution-Switcher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same AC, I liked TeraTerm on Windows. To connect to real linux from Windows 7. Had tabs and needed to spend about a minute in fonts settings to make it decent looking.
      I see that Tera Term still is very actively maintained, although I don't know if it has explicit WSL support.

  27. Running Linux on Windows is like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ...letting someone tow your Porsche around 24/7 instead of driving it yourself. It's slow, prone to collisions, you can't get everywhere and if the driver of the tow truck at some point says you can't turn right, there's nothing you can do about it.

    1. Re:Running Linux on Windows is like... by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      Awesome lol I wish I had mod points.

  28. Wine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you're looking for Wine

  29. I'd rather it was the other way around. by John.Banister · · Score: 1

    Perhaps MS could sell me a nice proprietary version of Wine.

  30. Does no one remember Microsoft's 3 E's? by geekprime · · Score: 2, Informative

    "Embrace, extend, and extinguish",[1] also known as "Embrace, extend, and exterminate",[2] is a phrase that the U.S. Department of Justice found[3] was used internally by Microsoft[4] to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely used standards, extending those standards with proprietary capabilities, and then using those differences to disadvantage its competitors.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    1. Re:Does no one remember Microsoft's 3 E's? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Embrace, extend, and extinguish",[1] also known as "Embrace, extend, and exterminate",[2] is a phrase that the U.S. Department of Justice found[3] was used internally by Microsoft[4] to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely used standards, extending those standards with proprietary capabilities, and then using those differences to disadvantage its competitors.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      I think most adults are capable of making an educations risk/reward justment based on more than just a simple catchphrase, thanks.

    2. Re:Does no one remember Microsoft's 3 E's? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      "Embrace, extend, and extinguish"

      Everyone remembers it. We also know what is involved and what it requires. So let's have a quick look at it:

      The embrace stage involves embracing a complete system, protocol whatever. Being compatible with it so that MS becomes a proper alternative to the previous use case. WSL only achieves a very small subset of embracing. They are able to run a few select GNU tools, nothing more. They haven't embraced Linux.

      The extend stage involves having sufficient market share of the target market to be able to force the market in a certain direction. Even in WSL gets 100% of the use cases it is designed for it will have very little of the overall Linux / Unix use scenarios and a pittance of the market share. They can extend all they want but there are reasons why WSL is not a substitute for running Linux and never will be.

      The extinguish stage is a logical extension of extend by adding an incompatibility. Again they can't achieve this without absolute dominance in the target market.

      Now for another key difference in the strategies:
      We all remember EEE, and we remember it quite well. We also remember what Microsoft was like at the time. No I'm not talking about evil corporations, I'm talking about a company with very brilliantly strategic minds at the helm. A company that can see what competitors do and cut them off at the knees in the process. That company died during the Steve Ballmer era, and the corpse was salted and a steak driven through its heart by Satya Nadella's appointment. What Microsoft is now is a behemoth that can do nothing but throw money at the wall and see what sticks. In some cases they have had success. Pissing money into the clouds has worked to some degree and for all the expense they have achieved somewhere between 5% and 35% of the market share depending of which aspect of the cloud you measure and they did so on the backs of open source where their 35% is in the applications area (what should be a borderline monopoly for MS) and yet 40$ of that is running on Linux on Azure. And that was their success which completely ignores the money they have pissed away in the mobile space to achieve 0% market share and writing off the acquisition of one of the world's most famous mobile brands despite the ability to closely tie their mobile and desktop space together with their Windows dominance.

      So in summary: We remember EEE, but this isn't EEE. It lacks the market conditions to become EEE, and Microsoft's leadership lacks the strategic competence to implement EEE.

    3. Re:Does no one remember Microsoft's 3 E's? by bazorg · · Score: 1

      With Satya Nadella as CEO, Microsoft seems to be quite more interested in "Embrace, have the user pay rent for Azure-related things forever". It doesn't sound as nifty as the 3 E's of yesteryear but it's clearer than the Underpants gnomes strategy.

  31. Windows is losing, Office is their money maker by raymorris · · Score: 1, Informative

    Microsoft sees that they are losing in the OS space.
    Yes, corporate desktops still run Windows, but the vast majority of CPUs sold in the last ten years aren't corporate desktops. Where MS is making their money is MS Office cloud subscriptions.

    1. Re: Windows is losing, Office is their money maker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But they aren't losing at all. Just because people now have mobile devices doesn't mean they threw away Windows and will never buy a Windows PC again.

      MS is simply falling victim to averages. The numbers getting smaller don't indicate a real shrinkage. Just that there's more to consider now.

      Take me for instance. I had 2 PCs running Windows so 100% Windows for me. Now I have an iPhone so 66% Windows. Do I have less Windows? Nope, still 2. Averages don't work.

    2. Re:Windows is losing, Office is their money maker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MS is not losing the OS space they are taking more control. I guess their lawyers figured out how to handle the GPL licensing mine field in order to include open source applications and OS's in their product offering. Hell MS figured out how to extract IP royalties every time a cell phone manufacturer sells an Android device.

      Why bother with Linux when you can use a Windows OS that can provide the best of both worlds? Is there a Linux distro capable of providing Linux and Windows support on the same desktop?

    3. Re:Windows is losing, Office is their money maker by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      Is there a Linux distro capable of providing Linux and Windows support on the same desktop?

      Any Linux OS that you can install a VM on or use wine with does.

    4. Re:Windows is losing, Office is their money maker by gweihir · · Score: 1

      So you think they are planning to go no-OS and sell browser-based cloud office licenses? Possibly. I mean, it would not be very difficult to make Windows 11 actually a window-manager on top of X11 and a set of tools. Would not even need to be Linux below that, one of the BSDs or a commercial Unix would do just fine.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  32. Mac is official Unix (tm). Linux is not by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Fyi MacOS (formerly known as OS X) is actually, officially Unix, and carries the Unix trademark. It's MORE Unix-like than Linux is, because Mac *is* UNIX. Linux is not Unix. (Linux stands for "LInus's Not UniX".

    1. Re:Mac is official Unix (tm). Linux is not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Linus originally named it Freax, but Ari Lemmke, an administrator of the FUNET FTP server, didn't like that name and called it Linux on the server. Linux does not have a fun "not UNIX" history. XNU, the MacOS kernel, stands for X is Not Unix though.

      EulerOS is a Red Hat-derived Linux distribution that actually does have UNIX certification, so there is at least one Linux distribution that is "actually" UNIX.

    2. Re:Mac is official Unix (tm). Linux is not by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      Fyi MacOS (formerly known as OS X) is actually, officially Unix, and carries the Unix trademark. It's MORE Unix-like than Linux is, because Mac *is* UNIX.

      A Slackware system is more like a classic UNIX system than an OSX system is, even though the OSX system has UNIX certification and the Slackware system doesn't. That's because slackware uses sysvinit and OSX uses launchd, which nobody likes, and because OSX doesn't use X (although you can load an X server, it sucks.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  33. Corporate IT is hostage to Windows by raymorris · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > Spending time & effort to find a way to run Linux distros inside Windows is like struggling to find a way to mount an Abrams tank on top of a Mini-Cooper.
    > What's the point outside of a few edge-cases where it may possibly be helpful/convenient?

    For the user, the point is that for 20 years Microsoft's strategy was to ensure vendor lock-in for corporate IT environments. A lot of companies therefore issue Windows desktops and won't provide Linux desktops. Microsoft did a pretty good job of making it difficult for large corporations to use anything but Windows because of all the inter-related proprietary stuff. An organization can easily run Windows or not run Windows, but if the company chose Windows it's been hard to add a few Linux desktops to the mix. Partially because everyone in corporate IT knows the Microsoft way of doing things, not cross-platform standards.

    I can be FAR more productive using Linux than Windows. Now, I can continue to use Linux, on the Windows desktop issued by corporate headquarters.

    1. Re:Corporate IT is hostage to Windows by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      One of the casino corps I do electrical for here in Las Vegas supplies their devs and IT with Microsoft, Macintosh and Linux desktops and laptops upon request. I guess they don't let the small cost get in the way of helping their employees have a comfortable work environment? I don't know know the exact reason they allow it. I guess I will have to ask someone next time I'm there. But I personally think if someone can do their work on an other OS system and it doesn't interfere with production it should be rewarded. Hell might even cut down on some of these damn breeches with people opening click baity emails and the such. Dont get me wrong, I understand that linux and mac computers can catch the hivvy also, its just a lot less developed for in the wild and in my experience the other OS's get better patches out faster.

  34. different package name by DrYak · · Score: 2

    That package might be called "wine" or "VirtualBox" in yoir distro~~

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:different package name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VMware is better if you want to play games or use some OpenGL based apps. At least it is, when I use Nvidia proprietary driver. VMware and Nvidia use their own OpenGL implementation, which works better than using Mesa. I haven't tried with Nouveau driver (uses Mesa) though, Nouveau probably works better with VirtualBox (also uses Mesa).

    2. Re:different package name by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      You can use QEMU as long as your motherboard and cpu support IOMMU. Takes a little more work but allows you to utilize bare hardware(Google PCI-E Passthrough)

  35. WSL vs Cygwin by DrYak · · Score: 2

    noy exactly Cygwin

    Cygwin boils down to a Windows DLL library that exposes POSIX compatible interfaces against which you can recompile source code (you can recompile Gimp for Windows). But you can't run any Unix binary un-modified.

    WSL is the NT kernel exposing(*) barely enough Linux APIs so that (a few, very simple) Linux ELFs can run unmodified on Windows.
    (it's a *realy tiny* subset of Linux kernel's API. so forget about running anything complex like FUSE, other file systems, Docker/LXC/etc, X11 or Wayland, complex network filtering, ...)
    Target public are mostly devs who would want to quickly test a compiled executable before deploying to the actual server, but don't want to bother setting up a whole VirtualBox VM.

    ---
    (*): NT Kernel has this weird multiple personality disorder, were it can expose entirely different APIs.
    That used to be used by Microsoft to enable support for OS/2 applications, back in th early days.
    Recently, Microsoft had hoped to miraculously keep Windows 10 Mobile relevant on the smartphone market by tapping into the big Android system by making it able to run apps. That proved too complex and failed miserably. WSL is what they managed to salvage out of the failure, and to repurpose as a dev's testing tool to run ELFs.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:WSL vs Cygwin by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Target public are mostly devs who would want to quickly test a compiled executable before deploying to the actual server, but don't want to bother setting up a whole VirtualBox VM.

      They could just download an image, they don't have to do it themselves. And testing against not-the-real-thing means you didn't test.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:WSL vs Cygwin by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      (it's a *realy tiny* subset of Linux kernel's API. so forget about running anything complex like FUSE, other file systems, Docker/LXC/etc, X11 or Wayland, complex network filtering, ...)

      It is also highly feature incomplete and still being developed. So while you're right, I expect your post may be less right as time progresses.

    3. Re:WSL vs Cygwin by godefroi · · Score: 1

      Best use for WSL that I've found is to finally have a good SSH client on Windows.

      --
      Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
    4. Re:WSL vs Cygwin by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Best use for WSL that I've found is to finally have a good SSH client on Windows.

      I've switched to using WSL instead of Cygwin on my Windows 10 systems. Cygwin is nice (all binaries are Windows binaries), but it's just a lot easier to have a full Debian or Ubuntu or whatever installation around. (Notably, Cygwin doesn't have standard C library manpages). Plus, I get full access to the repositories of those distributions - if there's no Cygwin port of something, you can try compiling it, but it may or may not work. WSL, I can apt-get what I need.

      It's not the best, but it's usable enough that I can run important stuff on it. Plus, Windows ports of some utilities are hokey and run better under Linux (like youtube-dl).

      That said, Cygwin still has stuff WSL doesn't, like an X server.

    5. Re:WSL vs Cygwin by godefroi · · Score: 1

      Ah, but you *can* use Cygwin's X server and run the clients from WSL. At least, I believe you can: https://virtualizationreview.c...

      --
      Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
    6. Re:WSL vs Cygwin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, I do it all the time.

  36. Docker by DrYak · · Score: 1

    Yo dawg

    ...which is exactly what Docker (and LXC, and systemd-nspwan, etc.) is on Linux.

    (and for the "and Knuckles and Knuckles and Knuckles" meme people out there: yes you can run docker inside docket)

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  37. Re: Great news by nowwith25percentmore · · Score: 1

    Did you mean "Nobody should be deprived of the games Windows plays"?

  38. Good points by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Those are good points. The poor support for X is annoying.

  39. don't care by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    I won't run on my computer and I don't fucking care. I like Windows 7.

  40. Microsoft's revenue numbers disagree with you by raymorris · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here are some revenue numbers quoting directly from Microsoft's audited annual report:

    ---
              Office commercial products and cloud services revenue increased 10% (up 10% in constant currency) driven by Office 365 commercial revenue growth of 41% (up 41% in constant currency) ...
    Windows commercial products and cloud services revenue decreased 4% (down 5% in constant currency)
    ---

    Office 365 up 41%, Windows down 5â.... Those are the numbers.

    1. Re:Microsoft's revenue numbers disagree with you by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      I'd be willing to bet that the windows revenue going down is a function of two things:

      1. You no longer need a new machine every few years unless you're a gamer.
      2. Win10's disturbing privacy issues which make gamers go for W7, which they often cannot legally get any more. So they have to pirate it.

    2. Re:Microsoft's revenue numbers disagree with you by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Except that revenue numbers don't tell the story about success in the OS space. Rather than just quoting numbers read the report. Windows revenue is down 5% which is better than expectations given the general decline in OEMs. i.e. Windows is doing better than the market and therefore they are just fine in the OS space.

  41. NetBSD by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    Is it able to run a non Linux system, for instance NetBSD?

    It depends on how it is implemented. Is it an hypervisor? A Linux kernel API emulation? A POSIX API?

    1. Re:NetBSD by _merlin · · Score: 1

      It emulates the Linux kernel system calls and loads Linux ELF binaries. You won't be able to run NetBSD binaries with this, only Linux binaries.

  42. Cygwin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have been using Cygwin since 2004.
    Why do I need our overlords to give me their version of something that hasn't stopped working since then ?
    It even runs X11
    I'm not even going to bother seeing if Microsoft does DWM/FVWM

  43. Seamless is pushing it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But wine allows 'seamless' application support on Linux (with some annoyances around fullscreen apps and imho the wine virtual desktop mode works better with fullscreen apps since it doesn't lock out virtual desktop switching keys so you can have your fullscreen videogames while multitasking with web browsing and im, all without waiting for a task switch or your app to crash because it doesn't handle alt-tabs to desktop well.)

    qemu, virtualbox, and vmware all support or used to support various methods of system integration, usually network filesystems to share files, but at least one of them I believe supported drag and drop between the host OS desktop and the client desktop inside of virtualization, either via clipboard or drag and drop driver/events.

    Personally, I have been windows free since XP support was dropped, and nowadays the majority of my XP apps run with less issues on linux than Windows, especially in regards to gpu drivers. As soon as they fix a few REALLY minor issues (a Z buffering issue causing the water/waves in Test Drive Unlimited to be above the terrain while driving being the most noticable), and if perhaps linux can get Crossfire/SLI support across all R600+/Tesla cards, I will have no compelling reason to ever use Windows again. And honestly the Crossfire/SLI is just convenience/window dressing. As it is right now, Linux is within a few FPS of Windows for XP era games, and generally has less stuttering on the same underperforming hardware. Given that this was tested pre-Meltdown, I imagine the difference is more pronounced today.

  44. Active Directory etc by raymorris · · Score: 2

    Microsoft provides a big network system, with Active Directory at the center. Active Directory is a database for storing user information, a configuration management system, a DNS server, an email server, and about 20 other things. It interacts with a bunch of other products using Microsoft proprietary protocols. If a company buys into the Microsoft network plan, where Active Directory is the central brain of everything, it can be a hassle to use any non-Microsoft products anywhere in the network.

    If, on the other hand, you build your network using standard network protocols, you can easily have Windows, Mac, Linux, Cisco, and Android devices, all talking to each other.

    1. Re:Active Directory etc by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      I really dont see what would stop my linux device from communicating with a microsoft dns server, or mail server or any of the file servers a company would use. config utilitys yes, but if its built around SNMP i dont see it not working either.

    2. Re:Active Directory etc by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      A constant problem I have experienced is Windows systems will auto populate themselves into MS DNS. Linux systems will not, even if they are joined to the domain.
      Sometimes I've had success using 'nsupdate' to add the entry, but the DNS server seems to forget them periodically.

  45. MAPI by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Any mail client can use standardized email protocols such as SMTP, pop3, and IMAP, to interface with any mail server that is based on standard protocols.

      In Microsoft-based networks, Outlook speaks MAPI with Exchange. There is no SMTP, IMAP, or pop3. MAPI is based on COM, a too-clever-by-half programming model that Microsoft developed COM (aka Active X) as the next version of Object Linking and Embedding, before the whole concept was obsoleted by HTML. Basically what COM is designed for is to set up a rather complex binary interface to declare that a Word document should have a certain picture or sound embedded in it. Microsoft execs had a heart attack when their billion-dollar effort was replaced by "IMG src".

    Anyway, back to MAPI, the protocol used by Outlook, Exchange, and other Microsoft products. MAPI is COM over RPC. RPC is another Microsoft invention-by-committee. Basically imagine Lennart Poettering got super drunk with Weird Al Yankovich and they re-invented SOAP together, with a bit of REST thrown in for metadata, but decided it should all be binary - no readable text allowed. That's Microsoft RPC.

    Nobody else but Microsoft uses MAPI, which is, shall we say "not astonishing".

  46. That's what they've been doing. by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Office 365 (Office in the Cloud) is indeed what they've been pushing, and where they have increased their revenue. They gave away Windows 10 upgrades, didn't even try to sell it.

    Windows *is* still important as an Active Directory client. The whole ecosystem around Active Directory, corporate networks with Microsoft everything, is still a money-maker for them. Windows on corporate desktops means they can make money around Exchange, Active Directory, etc, and by extension SQL Server and other things they sell to Windows-based organizations. Windows itself isn't the money-maker, that's just the (nearly free) client used to access their expensive server and networking products.

  47. Embrace, Extend, Extinguish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like a good old M$ tactic.

  48. Proposal: Windows version that runs in Linux by fygment · · Score: 1

    Okay so now for the next wave, a windows version that runs in Ubuntu. _That_ would be nice.

    --
    "Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
  49. Annexation of Linux continues on schedule by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    Before too long they'll be convincing you that you don't ever NEED to 'install' Linux standalone. Once they accomplish that, Microsoft hegemony will be complete; they will OWN everything.

  50. What is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can someone explain how this actually works under the hood? Is it VM? Is it like coLinux? Is it like cygwin?