Linux Now Dominates Azure (zdnet.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: Three years ago, Mark Russinovich, CTO of Azure, Microsoft's cloud program, said, "One in four [Azure] instances are Linux." Then, in 2017, it was 40 percent Azure virtual machines (VM) were Linux. Today, Scott Guthrie, Microsoft's executive vice president of the cloud and enterprise group, said in an interview, "Slightly over half of Azure VMs are Linux. That's right. Microsoft's prize cloud, Linux, not Windows Server, is now the most popular operating system. Windows Server isn't going to be making a come back. Every month, Linux goes up," Guthrie said. And it's not just Azure users who are turning to Linux.
"Native Azure services are often running on Linux," Guthrie added. "Microsoft is building more of these services. For example, Azure's Software Defined Network (SDN) is based on Linux." It's not just on Azure that Microsoft is embracing Linux. "Look at our simultaneous release of SQL Server on Linux. All of our projects now run on Linux," Guthrie said.
"Native Azure services are often running on Linux," Guthrie added. "Microsoft is building more of these services. For example, Azure's Software Defined Network (SDN) is based on Linux." It's not just on Azure that Microsoft is embracing Linux. "Look at our simultaneous release of SQL Server on Linux. All of our projects now run on Linux," Guthrie said.
If only Windows Server OS was free as in beer. Its cost is a barrier to entry for those wanting to learn it, and develop on it.
Guess it's time to move to FreeBSD.
I always read that Microsoft had a policy of using its Own software, so the staff could easily identify bugs & bad user interfaces (and improve them). Maybe they've abandoned that philosophy.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Note to Self, use products that actually work the way they're suppose to win. Force yourself to take the corporate cool-aid, lose....
It's not just on Azure that Microsoft is embracing Linux.
Just make your next desktop OS (Windows XI ?) be a Linux based, MS ripped-from-somewhere GUI, and you're all set. No reason you couldn't include the usual spyware in such a system. Linux zealots would work hard to make such a desktop perform excellent across the widest choice of hardware options out there.
After that's said 'n done, Linux on Azure is just another day in the office.
Remind me again, I forgot.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I wish there was a way to prevent MS from using Linux after all the effort they put into thwarting it. (FUD, SCO lawsuit, etc.) They fact that they are making money from it now, does not seem right. Maybe now that they are adopting it (only because their customers demanded it), means this is the beginning of the end for Windows.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
he'd be rolling over in his grave.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
I hate to be a stickler for words, but "Slightly over half of Azure VMs are Linux" is not the traditional definition of dominate.
To be clear, I am a Linux user/lover - desktop and server. I'm happy Microsoft is making good money supporting Linux. It's just a slight majority is not what I would normally call domination.
Ubuntu isn't the innovator it once was. Better hardware support and fewer performance issues can be found in a number of other distributions. If Ubuntu sold out, everyone would just jump ship to something else. Who cares if Windows has it's own distribution. Nobody. That's who.
From what I can tell, under the new leadership, Microsoft likes making money more than forcing Windows and Office on users. If they can make money selling Linux services for less effort, why not do so?
I think this is a great development and I respect where Satya Nadella is taking the company. I like the prospect of Microsoft being a powerful, profitable software company that plays well with others. I get the impression Nadella does as well.
If Windows Server was THAT much better then Linux according to all the FUD, er "research", MS paid off from the Gartner Group, etc, W.R.T. ROI, etc., then why is there such a HUGE upswing in Linux?
What are the areas tha MS is _publicly_ admitting where Linux does a better job then Windows?
Lest we forget: Microsoft contributes a lot of code to the kernel, mostly to make their products run better. So in a broad sense, Linux is part of Microsoft's own dog food.
This might seem incongruous -- it sure does to me! -- but I am reminded of something Vernard Martin said about Linux: its role isn't to beat Microsoft, but to keep Microsoft honest.
Finding God in a Dog
If this was a decade ago, I would have been double checking the calendar!
Running a Linux VM on windows makes it dependent on Win10's vulnerabilities, security holes, etc...
Better would be to run Win10 as a VM on Linux.
Better yet, don't use Win10 at all. Save yourself hundreds of bucks and forget Win10's problems. Isn't being on Microsoft's cash treadmill for 20 years enough punishment?
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
So, if MS is ready to do this to Ubuntu - why haven't they done this with Red Hat?
Finding God in a Dog
They never get rid of poor user interfaces. They just put something worse in front with an "advanced" button to go back to the old one. Which also has an "advanced" button, etc. Point in case: Configuring an IP address is the exact same thing as it was in windows 95. Well, up until 7 it was, dunno what they did afterward. But 95 to 7, every release stacked something new on the pile, with another "advanced" button leading to what came before.
The code we've seen leaked from them wasn't all that great *cough* either. redmond just has a terminal case of NIH, is all.
BSD really is dead.
You've really crapped the bed here.
1). "...at a HUGE scale, Unix/Linux is just better. It's built for that kind of thing..."
Yes. And so is Windows.
2). "...you can script literally anything in Linux. You can't in Windows..."
Wow. Your ignorance is showing! I'll not trouble you with the details, since I doubt you will care, or act on the new information.
3). "...it would cost them a ton of money to develop..."
It has been developed.
4). "Linux is free."
Sure! Linux is free if your time is free. Or did you mean Free As In Beer? Perhaps you meant Free As In Freedom? Well now we've opened the can of worms for sure, haven't we?
There is an argument to be made here but you certainly haven't made it.
Mark Twain would certainly agree, yes.
But I remember seeing virtualization-related commit-messages in FreeBSD, that indicated being sponsored by Microsoft. There are even official FreeBSD images for the cloud.
I think, the company would like to have alternatives to Linux work well on Azure. If only to keep Linux from becoming a monopoly — a monopoly, Microsoft will be unable to control...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Sort of funny Microsoft makes money selling Azure and over half run Linux on it. Who's benefiting from this arrangement??
When Microsoft start selling Linux-only computer in their windows store. Only then I will consider Microsoft to be 100% committed to Linux. Although I have to admit, MS is already doing a lot of goods.
Oh, I see, you're not from the corporate world.
Translating his corporate spin into English is pretty easy; subtract the downplay of bad news he was trying to deliver and you basically have this translation:
Yes, Linux is kicking our ass in Azure and we're looking at 75-90% of Linux servers vs Windows servers.
So only unimpeachable corporate entities can contribute.
Everyone else must open their personal lives to nosy weirdos on the internet.
...haven't solved apps running on all distributions.
And everything from Microsoft will be Linux based.
Ceci n'est pas une Signature !
Canonical may be irrelevant. But Red Hat is certainly capable of controling and strong-arming "solutions" onto the whole ecosystem. They do have full control over systemd, pulseaudio, GNOME, etc.
The "extend" bit is not going to plan. I thought when I heard powershell for linux or sqlserver for linux that MS would do more to promote that use, but I doubt anyone is going to adopt either of those. It looks more to me that MS are adopting open source than proprietary taking hold on linux.
Why UNIX?
"...you need to explain what you know about running servers that Google, Amazon, and Facebook do not know"
I'm paraphrasing someone but couldn't find the original. Maybe Paul Graham?
Sorry to disappoint you, folks, but the main reason Linux is so dominant on the server and embedded market is simply because it practically comes free. if MS starts giving away servers, IDEs and integration technology, which I believe will happen at some point, Linux will dwindle no matter if Windows is open source or not.
PS: Currently I earn my money on Linux :)
I hate to be a stickler for words, but "Slightly over half of Azure VMs are Linux" is not the traditional definition of dominate.
It is after what microsoft said about Linux and how much effort they put into killing it.
OMG though this thread is rocking it old school. Let's party like it's 1999. I should have spelled it Micro$oft. OK my parties may have sucked a bit back then.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
That rationale cannot be applied to Linux because it can't be bought, like, say, you buy Nokia and extinguish it. It's a piece of software with a license to be copied/modified/distributed. Microsoft could fork its own Linux and sell it as... whatever, AzureX (?), but cannot use the triple E paradigm.
Didn't I just read that Linux is dead and everyone is going to pull their code contributions from the kernel, essentially setting back development by years if not decades? Something about hypersensitive trans people fucking everything up? Where does that leave Microsoft?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Time to port Hotmail back to Linux!
Here's a simple question for you...if Windows is better or even as good as Linux as a server, then why are now half of the VMs in Azure Linux, and every month it goes up? This is according to Microsoft's VP of the Cloud and Enterprise group.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
But... I guess they bought github, so that's sort of a roundabout way to safe face.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
See my subject & letting you f yourself dumbass https://it.slashdot.org/commen... you inferior moron.
* Don't try "patronize" me BOY when I can show you are less than ZERO fucker... easily.
APK
P.S.=> Your DIM brains are blatantly inferior evidenced by your FAKE NAMES online for FAKE lives of being "ne'er-do-well" scum having the AUDACITY to even TRY "F" w/ me & ones like you you INFERIOR swine as I cast PEARLS before SWINE like you... apk
Just as the CoC weirdos have chased Linus out of Linux, dooming it to be a pile of shit in the next few years. It was a good run, but Linux quality is going to go down starting now.
It doesn't matter which 'free' OS (free for Microsoft) tops the Azure lists. Whether it's Windows or Linux, MS doesn't pay a dime in licenses as people rent more instances.
MS would be similarly happy if, say, WFWG 3.11 VDIs came to be a sleeper hit with developing world users (super fast, cents per user/year, no license impact, no cannibalisation).
But if OSX, Irix or VMS instances began to gain on Azure, MS would worry about revenue sharing with OS copyright holders.