Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Working on Porting Sysinternals To Linux (zdnet.com)

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

An anonymous reader writes: A Microsoft exec has confirmed yesterday that the company's engineers are working on porting the highly popular Sysinternals software package to Linux. Microsoft engineers have already ported the ProcDump utility and are currently working on porting ProcMon as well. More tools to follow.

Microsoft's decision to port this highly popular debugging utility to Linux comes after two months ago, in September, Scott Guthrie, Microsoft's executive vice president of the cloud and enterprise group, revealed that "sometimes slightly over half of Azure VMs are Linux." With Linux's growing adoption as the preferred OS for running Azure VMs, it's only natural that Azure engineers are now looking into porting their favorite debugging utilities to Linux, for both themselves but also for the company's customers.

183 comments

  1. How pointless is that by fisted · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is actually funny and sad. Don't the MS people realize that the only reason for using "sysinternals" is that their OS doesn't come with decent instrumentation by default? This toolset doesn't even come close to what's natively available in Unix or Linux.

    smh

    --
    CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
    1. Re:How pointless is that by slack_justyb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't the MS people realize that the only reason for using "sysinternals" is that their OS doesn't come with decent instrumentation by default?

      No.

      This toolset doesn't even come close to what's natively available in Unix or Linux

      Correct. However, no one wants to really learn how to use those tools. So that's where the demand for this comes from.

      I guess the question, Should folks learn these tools? Should folks educate themselves? is the underlying question here. I know exactly how I feel but, how I feel doesn't change the mentality one bit.

    2. Re:How pointless is that by caseih · · Score: 4, Informative

      To be fair, procmon is a pretty nifty GUI and can show you a lot of information in one place. More info than top.

      One thing that's always bothered me on windows is the lack of a simple way to determine what DLLs are missing. A missing shared library in linux will be apparent with an error message from the linker when you try to run the executable. Or you can use the ldd command to determine what shared libraries it links to and whether they can be found on the system. On Windows, you just get an error dialog box that says the program won't run, with no information about what is missing. And it's not easy to find out what the missing dlls are either. You have to resort to DLL dependency walkers. In terms of tools Windows is a bizarre mix of complete deficiencies and the fanciest GUI tools.

      Anyway it will be interesting to see what they come up with. The mere fact they want to port these highly OS-specific tools to Linux is very interesting, given MS's history with Linux. And we should be in favor of any tools that ease the transition away from a proprietary OS to something more open.

    3. Re:How pointless is that by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There is at least some benefit in having their entire team using a single tool across platforms. Apparently deemed worth the porting effort, anyway.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    4. Re: How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess as people ditch Microsoft shitware they can use familiar tools on linux.

    5. Re:How pointless is that by fisted · · Score: 1

      Correct. However, no one wants to really learn how to use those tools.

      The premise here is people switching their OS, isn't it? I'd say the people who don't want to learn how to use new tools would also not want to learn how to use a new OS?

      --
      CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
    6. Re:How pointless is that by llamalad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I see we're well into the "extend" phase now.

    7. Re:How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      port these highly OS-specific tools to Linux

      I'm thrilled to finally have regmon.exe on Linux. That's gonna be a life saver when systemd-registryd is rolled out!

    8. Re:How pointless is that by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

      ProcMon will show you file access attempts to find a DLL

    9. Re:How pointless is that by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      Well it is "highly popular."

    10. Re:How pointless is that by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

      ProcMon and Top have different uses. I think you are thinking of Process Explorer. ProcMon logs file accesses, registry accesses, and network activity. Very useful for analyzing process behavior and debugging a non-working application.

    11. Re:How pointless is that by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? It's been years since I've needed to go DLL hunting but every single program has told me what was missing.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    12. Re:How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ProcMon and Top have different uses. I think you are thinking of Process Explorer. ProcMon logs file accesses, registry accesses, and network activity. Very useful for analyzing process behavior and debugging a non-working application.

      Give it a few centuries and it might even be as useful as dTrace.

    13. Re: How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is like rehab... You need to purge poison from your system gradually

    14. Re:How pointless is that by stooo · · Score: 2

      https://www.brainyquote.com/qu...

      --
      aaaaaaa
    15. Re:How pointless is that by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      I see we're well into the "extend" phase now.

      Exactly!

    16. Re:How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There used to be a distributed, very neat, UNIX like OS called DomainOS. It had a registry daemon -- it was based on very advanced distributed computing algorithms, My favorite, which I have been wanting to add to Linux and FreeBSD is environment variable expansion in symlinks. But per-user namei caches are more work than I have time for.

    17. Re:How pointless is that by slack_justyb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd say the people who don't want to learn how to use new tools would also not want to learn how to use a new OS?

      One would think so. However, a lot of higher ups that would make the call to change the OS are not really concerned about the means, but more of the ends. So they see blah blah in marketing indicating Linux versus Windows, they instruct their underlings to get it done, and allocate all of zero time to the underlings getting properly trained. So the underlings resort to StackExchange to get day-to-day stuff done, wishing for a day where they could just use the tools they know to get day-to-day done. In this kind of environment you've got a statistical break. X% group will eventually pick things up by enough visits to Google, Y% will actually pick up a book and learn (maybe on their own dime outside of work), and Z% will just complain "Why can't this be easier?!" (incorrectly, mind you). It appears that Z% has tickled someone in the MS research department.

      Project managers and the folks calling shots just see Apache, Tomcat, node.js, or whatever the ends are. Underlings are the ones actually dealing with the details Apache on Linux vs Apache on Windows.

    18. Re:How pointless is that by tepples · · Score: 1

      Or you can use the ldd command to determine what shared libraries it links to and whether they can be found on the system.
      [...]
      You have to resort to DLL dependency walkers.

      What's ldd other than a dependency walker?

      I think part of the difference is that under Windows, the mentality is that the publisher of a particular application is responsible for quality control as to the inclusion of shared libraries needed to make the application operate on a freshly installed copy of Windows. If you're missing a library, you're supposed to get it from the installer that the publisher provided. If an application fails to run after its installer has completed, its installer is inadequate, and the user should ask for repair or refund.

    19. Re: How pointless is that by Order_66 · · Score: 0

      Yep, we're well past the "embrace" honeymoon, "extend" might last a couple of years then we know what's coming next.

    20. Re:How pointless is that by ElizabethGreene · · Score: 1

      I do application compatibility work. Part of that is helping customers move applications to newer machines when the original install media has been lost or (for homebrew apps) never existed.

      I go DLL fishing on a regular basis, and dependency walker (depends.exe) and Process Monitor (Procmon.exe) are lifesavers.

      (I work for Microsoft supporting Enterprise Customers. A very small part of my job is helping customers get that last blocker-application moved off of /win[ntxp0-9]{,4}/ so they can finally upgrade to Win10.)

    21. Re:How pointless is that by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 2

      Remind me of anything close to Process Monitor or Resource Monitor in Linux. Something as easy to use and visually complete.

      Process Monitor (previously FileMon + RegMon) = inotifywait + iotop? Not even close.

      Resource Monitor = a dozen of different utilities which you can quickly get lost in and where each one of them require a separate window/terminal?

      What about deep memory overview which is provided by RamMap?

      Even "simple" Task Manager in Windows 8/10 has nothing even close in Linux - something which shows processes and CPU/Disks/RAM/GPU/NIC utilization in a very easy to understand form.

      To be honest most of other utilities in SysInternals are what you will routinely find in any Linux distro or something that's very specific to Windows (NTFS/Domain/Registry) but the ones I've listed above would be very nice to have in Linux.

      Actually FileMon was available close to 15 years ago but it required a specific kernel version and it died without receiving too much publicity.

    22. Re:How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what. If you want folks to come over to linux (maybe you don't) then the learning curve will be reduced by porting over commonly used windows tools.

      You would have the same problem going the other way.

    23. Re:How pointless is that by mangastudent · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In their favor, it's MIT licensed. That's hard to abuse in a way negative for Linux except by using patents.

    24. Re:How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple faggot rips a Microsoft action. Who could have predicted that?

    25. Re: How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry you find the command-line so confusing and visually unappealing. Not really 'cause that's job security for those of us that figured it out.

    26. Re:How pointless is that by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      Don't the MS people realize that the only reason for using "sysinternals" is that their OS doesn't come with decent instrumentation by default?

      Statements like this make it obvious that fanboys of any kind don't understand that there are different markets and business needs. I'm a software developer that has coded on most platforms using many different compilers and languages. I don't make money or meet objectives by troubleshooting OS issues if my specialty is application development. I buy an OS which includes a large team of people that support said product. With Linux it's different as it's an open system which is intended to be tailored to specific needs. It's a versatile and lean OS which offers endless possibility. The flip side is you need to become more of an expert or hire said experts to achieve your objectives.

      I'm not ditching Linux or MS. Instead I'm just pointing out that there was a time where MS didn't have a need to provide said tools. Now they feel it matters and I see only benefits for the Linux community..

    27. Re:How pointless is that by fibonacci8 · · Score: 1

      This toolset doesn't even come close to what's natively available in Unix or Linux

      Correct. However, no one wants to really learn how to use those tools. So that's where the demand for this comes from.

      I guess the question, Should folks learn these tools? Should folks educate themselves? is the underlying question here. I know exactly how I feel but, how I feel doesn't change the mentality one bit.

      From anything false, anything follows.

      No one wants to pay employees enough money to learn what the employees willingly learn themselves, unless they can see an immediate profit from it. The false assumption that the thing with more restrictions, including price and licensing, is therefor the better thing means that Microsoft can continue to attempt embrace, extend, and extinguish simply by having more restrictive licensing when extending a Free product. Anyone who complains about restrictions imposed by the GPL variants being intolerable is pulling your leg. I recommend reading what closed source terms actually entail sometime. "Not being allowed to plagiarize" in exchange for permission to use copyrighted works by other people isn't a bad trade, and it's optional.

      --
      Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
    28. Re:How pointless is that by fisted · · Score: 4, Insightful

      strace, ltrace, hell, dtrace. if you have the source and aren't incompetent, gdb and valgrind.
      are just the first few that come to mind.

      Oh, you're looking for a tool *exactly* like file/regmon that craps out tens of thousands of lines in a piss poor performing text widget, faster than it can actually handle the input, so by default you have to add blacklisting filters (in addition to the dozen blacklisting filters that come preinstalled) to even narrow down the data to what you may be looking for? Yeah, sorry, I don't think that's happening, nor that anybody really needs/wants it. And it only makes sense for the classical Windows problem "something is wrong but nothing tells me even remotely what may be going on so I'll have to look at all processes and the kernel at the same time", anyway.

      --
      CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
    29. Re:How pointless is that by fisted · · Score: 2

      Some people may want folks to come over to linux, but that doesn't mean they want those folks to bring the windows approach to operating systems over to linux.

      If they're looking for a Linux that's a perfect (or imperfect) clone of Windows, they should probably stick with Windows, because it's not going to happen and it would be an incredibly pointless exercise too.

      --
      CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
    30. Re:How pointless is that by fisted · · Score: 1

      I don't see what the reply has to do with the quoted part, or with the whole comment for that matter.

      What's fanboyish about pointing out that there's no need to port over the highly Windows-specific ersatz-instrumentation when the target OS already has it?

      --
      CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
    31. Re:How pointless is that by Jahta · · Score: 1

      This is actually funny and sad. Don't the MS people realize that the only reason for using "sysinternals" is that their OS doesn't come with decent instrumentation by default? This toolset doesn't even come close to what's natively available in Unix or Linux.

      smh

      On the other hand, one of the selling points of Linux has always been choice; "there's more than one way to do it". The sysinternals tools are a mature set of system utilities and maybe, just maybe, at least some of the Linux ports might offer a useful addition/alternative to the existing Linux tools. Time will tell.

    32. Re:How pointless is that by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      How do I watch filesystem/network events from a specific or collection of applications running in user/admin space in realtime on Linux?

      I see lots of addons for Linux as well (nothing out of the box), but nothing as simple as procmon.

    33. Re:How pointless is that by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

      "We just want to extend the functionality of the native Linux. Make it better and easier to use! Of course it has to go through our SysInternals, as that's how we package that functionality. Trust us, once there's a group of people using these features, we PROMISE that we'll continue maintaining sysInternals and that everyone who is locked in and dedicated to using these features won't be bit in the ass. It's open source! If they don't like where it goes they can just switch away or fork it. We've got our top men working to make sure it's not a convoluted clusterfuck that's impossible for others to pick up. Top Men. And if they do try to fork it and develop it on their own, we certainly won't yank the chain with backwards-incompatible changes to the official branch."

    34. Re:How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess BSD is still dead.

    35. Re:How pointless is that by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1

      Some people may want folks to come over to linux, but that doesn't mean they want those folks to bring the windows approach to operating systems over to linux.

      I'm not sure how true that is considering how much work has gone into WINE, DXVK etc on Linux!

      Besides, in what way does SysInternals go against the Linux way of doing things? It's basically just a collection of small utilities, all of which can be installed independantly and some of which are straight versions of UNIX functions (or at least inspired by them).

      If they're looking for a Linux that's a perfect (or imperfect) clone of Windows...

      Considering that Sysinternals is not a part of Windows (and is not installed by default) then porting it is hardly making Linux a clone of Windows. One of the first things that I do when I install Windows is copy my trusty bin folder to it that contains the Unix utilities that I can't do without. Similarly, I install PowerShell when I make a Linux system. You might as well be pragmatic about what you use. You only inconvenience yourself if you become territorial with what is allowed to be written for your OS of choice.

    36. Re:How pointless is that by whoever57 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ProcMon logs file accesses, registry accesses, and network activity.

      So equivalent to strace?

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    37. Re:How pointless is that by whoever57 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All you are doing is showing your ignorance of Linux.

      strace provides the answer to your question.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    38. Re:How pointless is that by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1

      I see we're well into the "extend" phase now.

      What exactly do you think that Microsoft is extending? They are not changing anything that already exists on Linux; they are porting new utilities that will not be part of any standard Linux installation (perhaps with the exception a default install on Azure). But none of these utilities will displace the existing GNU utiltiies.

      If Microsoft ported Office to Linux, would you call that extending the operating system or just writing software that works on it? Sysinternals is no different to that.

    39. Re:How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moreover, comparing the (hopefully additional) functionality of Sysinternals on Linux to that of its Windows counterpart would show the vast but ever closing (in my opinion) difference between the worlds of Win and Unix.

    40. Re:How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cross-platform scaling is actually something only advanced dev shops are capable of and it is very easy to do with .NET Core. Didn't the Java... C++, Linux shell people hear about that? Or maybe they are just not willing to learn

    41. Re:How pointless is that by caseih · · Score: 1

      Good for you. You're must not be a developer. Or one that deals with cross-platform developing and deployment including cross compiling. Most build systems have pretty good tools for making sure all the right dlls are bundled with the executable, but sometimes there are problems. As well as the kinds of things the other poster posted about.

      I'm very glad you haven't had to deal with these issues. But they are very real and Windows doesn't make it super easy to track them down.

    42. Re:How pointless is that by caseih · · Score: 2

      It's not a dependency walker in the Windows sense. ldd simply parses the executable and spits out all the shared libraries the linker is going to need to find to load the executable because they are all listed there. In Windows this information can't always be found by simply looking at the executable because dlls themselves can refer to other dlls. So you figure out you're missing dll A but when you copy it in, now the whole system is missing dll B and so on. A dependency walker has to, well walk the dlls and make a big list of all the dlls that are ultimately needed by the exe.

      Elf shared libraries, on the other hand, can and do refer to other shared libraries, but the executable itself usually has to have all of these subdependencies explicitly linked in to the binary itself. So except for dynamically opened shared libraries (Qt and GTK+ both do that for some functionality), you can very quickly and accurately get a list of required shared libraries from binary itself.

    43. Re:How pointless is that by higuita · · Score: 1

      you already have that in gnome dconf

      Just try it, type "dconf-editor"

      That is why many people say that gnome is the linux "windows", one size fits all, they are always right, everyone else must follow then and even include a registry! :D

      --
      Higuita
    44. Re:How pointless is that by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      However ugly gconf is it's at least not a big binary blob of a database like the Windows registry.

    45. Re:How pointless is that by higuita · · Score: 1

      And currently you can use in any linux strace and maybe gdb to find what the app is doing.
      On newer linux distros you have or multiple extra tools, like perf, ltrace, ftrace, lttng, sysdig, eBPF, systemtap

      Probably MS will hook strace and maybe some perf, ltrace and maybe eBPF for more advanced things ... lets see how will MS eBPF code will crash the kernel in fun ways! ;)

      --
      Higuita
    46. Re:How pointless is that by higuita · · Score: 1

      so your problem is that you know windows tool and do not know the linux ones... so of course everything is hard that way!

      process monitor: duh, strace! more complex things you can use perf or eBPF
      resource monitor: are you talking of htop and atop and many other tools that merge those other tools stats?

      No idea what is RamMap, but i suspect it is a GUI for /proc/1/smaps and maybe other proc files

      Simple "task manager", htop works fine... you do not have network in there, it is included in the IO as linux have not a easy way to map network usage restricted to process

      Or maybe you mean that you do not like text based tools? that is ok, there are some GUI tools too, but sysinternals ones will be just one more

      --
      Higuita
    47. Re: How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is like rehab... You need to purge poison from your system gradually

      While getting infected by another virulent disease known as SystemD.

    48. Re:How pointless is that by eneville · · Score: 1

      > ProcMon will show you file access attempts to find a DLL

      systemtap and dtrace not good enough for you?

      --
      Why UNIX?
    49. Re:How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashbots are still stuck in 1996

    50. Re:How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even "simple" Task Manager in Windows 8/10 has nothing even close in Linux - something which shows processes and CPU/Disks/RAM/GPU/NIC utilization in a very easy to understand form.

      KSysGuard (system monitor for KDE) offers more than that. On my system it shows everything you mentioned + CPU temperature + Fans (CPU, case, system, etc) rotation + much more. Basically you can add every (supported) sensor which are listed on your system. It can even monitor remote host, Win 10 Task Manager can do that?

    51. Re:How pointless is that by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      "Even "simple" Task Manager in Windows 8/10 has nothing even close in Linux - something which shows processes and CPU/Disks/RAM/GPU/NIC utilization in a very easy to understand form. "

      You should check out gkrellm (client/local app) and gkrellmd (daemon process for server monitoring) - you get all that plus CPU/GPU temps, fan speeds (CPU and Chassis), voltages and more.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    52. Re:How pointless is that by dougmc · · Score: 1

      Should folks learn these tools? Should folks educate themselves?

      That's definitely a fair way of looking at the issue.

      I certainly do install cygwin on Windows boxes rather than learn how to really use all the stuff that Windows has to offer natively ...

      (I know how to use some of it, but ... for the more complicated stuff, I tend to do it in cygwin because it's easier.)

    53. Re:How pointless is that by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Extending their own product into a competitors?

      I assume you're chasing cheap laughs with your EEE comment and aren't silly enough to think that this is a viable strategy given what they are doing, what product they are targetting or how they are currently operating. If you think it is, then you should go back to the start and re-read how EEE works.

    54. Re:How pointless is that by mangastudent · · Score: 1

      Guess they shouldn't have sent Linus to reeducation camp and imposed one of the worst CoCs known to man, err, xir, hired a non-technical HR type to advise on how to enforce it, including setting up a new Committee of Public Linux Safety. Remove what kept the kernel sane, and who knows how it might eventually get twisted. Meanwhile, I'm moving to OpenBSD (which in all fairness I started because of systemd).

    55. Re:How pointless is that by fisted · · Score: 1

      Besides, in what way does SysInternals go against the Linux way of doing things?

      You seem to have gone on autopilot there. I haven't said it's against any way of doing anything. I merely find the idea of porting that amusing (have you even considered how portable sysinternals is going to be given what it does?) and pointless.

      Similarly, I install PowerShell when I make a Linux system.

      Wow

      --
      CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
    56. Re:How pointless is that by higuita · · Score: 1

      uhhhmm ... lets use file... /home/higuita/.config/dconf/user: GVariant Database file, version 0

      yes, you are correct, it is a big binary gvariant database, totally different! ;)

      This because "apps" need to constantly check for their configs instead of loading a text file on startup... loading a text file every 5s is slow and adding some reload menu option is ugly, so lets use a binary blog so it is 30% faster!

      --
      Higuita
    57. Re:How pointless is that by spitzak · · Score: 1

      ldd also does such recursive searches.

    58. Re:How pointless is that by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1

      I haven't said it's against any way of doing anything.

      Then what does this mean:

      ...that doesn't mean they want those folks to bring the windows approach to operating systems over to linux

    59. Re:How pointless is that by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      strace does not tell you what process accessed the file specified by the filename (I think inotifywait can do that). Or what was the full commandline of process, that produced the event, and is now gone. And it is kind of difficult to track down the IP address and port from socket descriptor (though you can get much information from tcpdump).

    60. Re:How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " A very small part of my job is helping customers get that last blocker-application moved off of /win[ntxp0-9]{,4}/ so they can finally upgrade to Win10.)"

      I don't know how you sleep at night. Win10 is utter garbage. You're like a drug dealer giving out shitty meth to kids.

    61. Re: How pointless is that by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      Better than getting VenerealD,I suppose, regardless of platform.

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
    62. Re: How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are people supposed to swap to Linux and hope their business critical Windows based software works under WINE?

    63. Re: How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First (systemd tard) post.^

    64. Re:How pointless is that by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      I don't see what the reply has to do with the quoted part, or with the whole comment for that matter.

      Maybe, depends how you read the comment

      What's fanboyish about pointing out that there's no need to port over the highly Windows-specific ersatz-instrumentation when the target OS already has it?

      Why not have more than one option? We have multiple options for spreadsheet editing, document editing, CAD editing, dev IDE... What makes this different? You know a tool and if you can use it across multiple platforms it's a win for the user.

    65. Re:How pointless is that by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      a fuck, I was almost sure that it was in xml. Must have thought about something else.

    66. Re:How pointless is that by higuita · · Score: 1

      previous gnome versions used gconf, that where many xml files ... as they were many and xml is not that easy to parse, it was slower than it needed to be... that was why they went the binary format for dconf (again, instead of simplifying/reverting to simpler and fewer text files like ini, yml, json) :)

      --
      Higuita
    67. Re:How pointless is that by caseih · · Score: 1

      You're right. I got it wrong. Mod my original post back down and mod spitzak up.

    68. Re:How pointless is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Don't the MS people realize that the only reason for using "sysinternals" is that their OS doesn't come with decent instrumentation by default?

      Christ.

      If Windows *did* come with the tools, you'd be complaining it's bloated with stuff 99% of all people will never need or use and they're out of date the instant the OS is released anyway.

      You just can't win.

  2. uhm.. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clearly they're not familiar with tools such as lsof, sysdig, tcpdump, netstat, etc. - or maybe I'm missing the point ?

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

      This could integrate perfectly with systemd, as like Windows, it also uses a monolithic proxy running all kinds of random services and does unknown operations on binary files using all kinds of default users and rules. On windows the ProcMon is really useful for finding what registry key or file access problems cause a helpful "Error, please try again [Ok]" dialog. On Linux it could help in finding the root cause for a system being unable to boot and which only logs a "systemd paused for 90s" on dmesg and dies.

    2. Re:uhm.. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah you are. Command line. Ugh.

    3. Re: uhm.. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't that encouraging developers to do bad system components?

      Seems like they normal way of development ist sometimes breaking things and hope layers and layers of components and abstractions hides the problem.

    4. Re:uhm.. Why? by eneville · · Score: 1

      > netstat

      ss deprecated 'netstat', though that is a Windows thing too.

      'strace' on windows would be handy.

      One of the things that makes Windows such a dead and forgotten OS is the lack of basic tools in the default install. It's a real PITA to get tcpdump or even telnet on a Windows machine. Linux is light years ahead in this respect. Given the lack of ease in operationally supporting Windows it's no surprise that no dev person wants to go near it.

      --
      Why UNIX?
    5. Re: uhm.. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      C:\> wsl
      $ telnet

  3. The new code... by reanjr · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Linux port operates on the command line, and is simply two line bash scripts and aliases.

  4. Re:I don't know how by ctilsie242 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is a difference. Back in the Halloween Documents era, MS wasn't making money from Linux. Now, they make money, hand-over-fist over Linux. That Android phone? MS makes something from each and every one of those. Azure? It doesn't really matter what OS people run on their cloud platform; they get charged for the VM anyway, so might as well make Linux work better.

    MS is in an odd position where their financial interests lie in keeping Linux going, so if they want to port some of their useful utilities, more power to them.

  5. with an EULA that gives MS full rights to your by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 3, Funny

    with an EULA that gives MS full rights to your system.

    1. Re:with an EULA that gives MS full rights to your by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EULA is a worthless piece of shit that holds no real power anywhere except for the US (and the UK probably). You can put whatever you want in there, I will accept it and you still can't do shit about it.

    2. Re:with an EULA that gives MS full rights to your by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has stated that, per the USA Patriot Act, the US government could have access to the data even if the hosted company is not American and the data resides outside the USA. However, Microsoft Azure is compliant with the E.U. Data Protection Directive.

      That sounds very contradictory. I doubt it is possible to be complaint with US and EU directives at the same time.

    3. Re:with an EULA that gives MS full rights to your by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing it depends on which data center you are in.

    4. Re: with an EULA that gives MS full rights to your by Order_66 · · Score: 0

      Including their infamous "telemetry".

    5. Re: with an EULA that gives MS full rights to your by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Even in the US, EULAs are pretty limited. Much of their content is regularly thrown out. The main thing is that by violating one, you can lose your copyright license to use the software. If you already have critical systems using the software, this can compel you to jump through EULA hoops in order to preserve your license against threat. The issue then becomes copyright law where you have no rights to the software someone makes unless granted.

  6. Dont need it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We already have tools like this.

  7. Does Linux need Microsoft malware? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can also bet your ass the the EULA will give Microsoft full insight to your system details, and report them all back to Microsoft "to enhance your experience".

    You would do well in not using Microsoft software on secure systems, such as Linux.

  8. First they ignore you, by mackul · · Score: 1

    then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. And then you win. Couldn't be happier today ;-)

    1. Re:First they ignore you, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. And then you win. --Gandhi

      First they march you through hundreds of miles of jungle without water. Then they shoot you. Then they disembowel you. And then you lose. --Gandhi, had the Japs won WW2

    2. Re:First they ignore you, by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      nope. that was against colonial Britain.

      The U.S. way is how it will be.

      they laugh at you, they fight you, they regime change your ass and use your country in an endless war for power and profit.

  9. What's that old saying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fool me once, shame on you, fool me every day for thirty years...

  10. Extend? by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 3, Informative

    Now that they have Embraced Linux, now they are Extending Linux. I wonder what's next. ;)

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:Extend? by stooo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Next step is obviously Extinguish.
      But this time it could be MS that gets extinguished...

      --
      aaaaaaa
    2. Re:Extend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MS OS Services for Linux. Enjoy the superior experience of forked, privilege separated svchost processes over the legacy SystemD experience from our blue in the face competitors!

    3. Re:Extend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They couldn't buy Red Hat outright. But they can buy IBM, who bought Red Hat several months prior.

    4. Re:Extend? by DarkOx · · Score: 2

      I think so actually. Nadella I think has been dead wrong on his management of the Windows properties. Opening it up has if anything slowed Windows development down in all the places that are important.

      Market share-wise its still king but that could change pretty fast in a progressively more web / network driven experience on the desktop, and the ability to move .NET / MSSQL server over to Linux pretty painless on the server end.

      Mind share-wise do you know anyone who is talking about Windows technologies as part of the long term road map; I sure as heck dont. When you IBM suggesting the TCO of managing a bunch of OSX machines is lower than windows desktops... Windows infrastructure in the enterprise is being increasingly seen as 'legacy' and burden to manage. In the cloud space is all "me too me too" "hey you can run docker containers and borne shell scripts on Windows" - "hey who gives a crap why would want to do that?; license fees and 10x the disk foot print are not features."

      As far as transitioning to a cloud provider; clap clap clap for Nadella - he took the leading software provider and turned it into the also-ran cloud provider... Microsoft's numbers still look pretty good but the last 3M in the market have not been "great" for them especially compared the broader market. I am struggling to see how MS's current strategy does not ultimately turn it into IBM - a lumbering tech dinosaur that survives on the back of CTO's who have not updated their opinions since the major computing publications stopped issuing printed magazines. Unless there is vision I am not seeing reading the tech press and the investor press - its not a bright future.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    5. Re: Extend? by WindBourne · · Score: 0

      Exactly. So many of the kids here are not aware of how MS operates.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    6. Re:Extend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nope. extend phase is when start including kernel modules and eBPF programs in kernel for advanced features. then start monetizing them. then ...
      well you don't kill something what brings money on table :)

    7. Re:Extend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Joke's on them, Linux will be scuttled by systemd before they can reach extinguish.

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

      Your keyboard to God's ears.

    9. Re:Extend? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Now that they have Embraced Linux, now they are Extending Linux. I wonder what's next. ;)

      Silly quotes by people who don't understand strategies or how they apply?

    10. Re: Extend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dave's not here man.

  11. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  12. Windows will become a Linux desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I have no doubt Windows will become just another Linux desktop eventually. Why bother paying Microsoft people to develop Windows OS when you can develop a hybrid Linux OS that run Windows apps. Obviously Microsoft is focused on Azure, the cloud, and enterprise services. That's where the real money is, not is useless consumer Windows products. Office 365 runs on anything, so its pretty clear Microsoft is not interested in a closed ecosystem anymore.

    1. Re:Windows will become a Linux desktop by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 1

      I can see this happening. The value of Windows kernel is pretty much gone, all it is is another expense on Microsofts budgets, so they could just shed the whole thing. They would mainly be concerned with porting all of their .NET stuff over to Linux as a migration pathway, which is already happening. I can could see them dropping the Windows kernel and replacing it with Linux kernel, basically Windows becoming a Linux distribution, maybe even dropping their C++ compiler and their C-land toolchain as well. It would still be called "windows' but much of the internals would be Linux stuff like the kernel, who knows, maybe even Wayland for graphics stack. A compatability layer (like WINE) for Windows applications to run on top of it. Maybe Microsoft will just fix up WINE to be good enough as a migration path.

    2. Re: Windows will become a Linux desktop by Order_66 · · Score: 0

      Funny thing is if Microsoft simply listened to their customers then windows would also be their money maker, but they're putting pride and arrogance ahead of that because they can afford to.

    3. Re:Windows will become a Linux desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Office 365 runs on anything

      Office365 web version runs on all OSes, but there are things you can't do on that, such as remove some page breaks, that you need a native version for. Or you can fix up the page breaks with LibreOffice. I presume that functionality will come to the web version in time.

    4. Re:Windows will become a Linux desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It will be interesting to see where they take the consumer-grade OS. I had heard they were planning on moving into a subscription model, I don't have the article link to cite, but it was posted on Slashdot some time ago. The article mentioned that the cloud infrastructure would be used, effectively removing the need for updates, and that's a very scary concept. (not the lack of having to update your machine, but the fact that core components are effectively hot-swapping.

      I feel like it would be fun to see a Microsoft Distribution, but I think all aspects of getting excited would quickly be thwarted. I'd fully imagine a lot of custom work, and while I guess you couldn't call it proprietary, for example if they forked the kernel and started adding some micro-sauce, and then started adding a bunch of tooling to support the current Microsoft ecosystem, I don't think it would end up looking much like an open operating system any more. I think we'd be looking at another OSX. And to that end, I would love to see something like this because, maybe it would mean I could run my favorite games which currently run on just windows, on my favorite distribution, but I doubt it, you'd need all the new micro-sauce, and even installing it with packages to another distribution would just end up causing the "borg" effect.

      I think another important thing to note, is windows itself, as a wildly popular platform, is not only servicing Microsoft, but also a couple software companies that happen to target it. Even though some of Microsoft's flagship products might be cross platform now, doesn't mean that all the other software we use and love is. I think the moves made with the .NET framework in recent years is helping to pave the way, but a great deal of software doesn't use it, or use it in an entirely managed way.

      So... I'd love to see this, and see them do it right. But I'm not holding my breath. =)

    5. Re:Windows will become a Linux desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really don't know a lot about the NT kernel. Worse, you think that the Linux kernal is the end-all, be-all. Idiots like you are why democracy around the globe is failing.

  13. BSOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hi hope they port the BSOD screensaver from the sysinternals kit as well.

    1. Re:BSOD by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hi hope they port the BSOD screensaver from the sysinternals kit as well.

      They did; it's called "systemd".

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    2. Re:BSOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi hope

      Hi hope

      It's off to work I gope

    3. Re:BSOD by antdude · · Score: 1

      https://www.jwz.org/xscreensav... has a BSoD screen saver. :P

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  14. eat our own dog food by AndrewFlagg · · Score: 1

    oh how the times have come around. .. when only a few core developers used NN 4.while other core developers only drank the MS IE Kool Aid. I miss OS/2 Warp yet I loved the C6 and C7 dev tools along side Borland C .. happy monday.. long live cron...

  15. E E E E, quad E, 4xE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Embrace
    Extend
    Enveigle
    Extinguish

    'nuff said

  16. Silos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the anti-silo idea. Apple used to be good at it, and Google is pretty decent at it now. The idea is you make everything available on every platform without worrying about cannibalizing your own sales. The more available your products are the more money you make. Microsoft was worried about releasing cloud and mobile versions of Office until they started getting hammered by Google Docs.

    1. Re:Silos by ledow · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Precisely.

      Though it doesn't mean "put in full support for every theoretical platform", coding to the exclusion of other platforms was always a silly idea.

      The problem was the link between, say, Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office. An office product shouldn't care about what OS it's running on and now that you can get it on others, it's actually more saleable. But that was to the detriment of Windows, which held the monopoly because "it's the only thing that runs Office" (in effect).

      When the monopoly was in their favour, they adored it. Now that it's not (i.e. they were shut out from other platforms and beaten by cheaper tools that work everywhere), they are all suddenly "behind" not being part of a monopoly. All it shows is that the courts should have taken harsher action, and faster, because it didn't really hurt Microsoft, but it did hurt the market enormously for a long time.

      Steam has had the same kind of realisation but never locked itself into an OS - their slow response is more surprising, they could have support Mac and Linux and even mobile platforms an awfully long time ago, without interfering with their primary money-makers (the games and marketplace store).

      Platform-specificity is not a good thing, for consumers or for the businesses that enforce it. If you have a service, you want it accessible to as many potential customers as possible. Anything else is artificial, monopolistic and counter-productive.

      Someone please tell Apple. Because I see absolutely no reason that you can't have Mac/iPad services work on a PC/tablet, and work better.

      And if MacOS really was SUCH a marvellously better OS, then people would be willing to pay for it, no? (In reality, I don't think it is, and Apple know that, and they know that their hardware is nothing special either - if they stopped the exclusivity and allowed MacOS to run on PC or just sell computers that people can choose the OS they want to run at purchase, they'd see huge losses... cheap PC's would kick their hardware offering's backside, and people would - at best - run MacOS on PC and get more out of it.)

      All these platform-lock-ins profit only the businesses that enforce them, and only for short-terms, and to the detriment of the consumers. And it's VERY profitable, as Microsoft and Apple have shown, and yet still they "lose" regularly.

      I've never worked out how Apple forcing you to "buy" MacOS on their machines (despite being capable of running other OS quite easily) is any different to what Microsoft did/do. Or what Google are being rebuked for with Android. Same for bundling office apps, things like Pages, Garageband, etc. and services like iTunes.

      If your service is really that good, you'll let me use it from the platform of my choice.

    2. Re:Silos by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      > But that was to the detriment of Windows, which held the monopoly because "it's the only thing that runs Office" (in effect).

      This has never been true, though. Office basically started out as Macintosh exclusive software that was ported to Windows years later. This was the case for Excel and PowerPoint, and for a span of four years, Word existed only for DOS and Macintosh. Office has always been available on the Mac,

  17. You mean by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

    systemd doesn't have APIs for Python to do this already?

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
  18. Don't kick them when they are down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MS lost the Operating System tug of war. We can cut them some slack now. If they want to pretend that their tools are useful on Linux, that is fine. It won't hurt anyone.

    1. Re:Don't kick them when they are down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet you voted for Hillary.

    2. Re:Don't kick them when they are down by NikeHerc · · Score: 1

      MS lost the Operating System tug of war. We can cut them some slack now.

      No, don't cut them any slack, not as long as ms is a profitable company. They wouldn't cut you any slack. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish which says '"Embrace, extend, and extinguish", also known as "Embrace, extend, and exterminate", is a phrase that the U.S. Department of Justice found was used internally by Microsoft to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely used standards, extending those standards with proprietary capabilities, and then using those differences to strongly disadvantage its competitors.'

      I prefer what George S. Patton said: "Nobody ever defended anything successfully, there is only attack and attack and attack some more."

      Sic'em, Linus!

      --
      Circle the wagons and fire inward. Entropy increases without bounds.
  19. Work Better? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so might as well make Linux work better.

    This initiative will do nothing to make Linux work better. By contrast, ending the patent wars would free up more resources for Linux developers.

  20. Brick wall by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

    I wonder if the Linux version will show Ballmer's brick wall, just like the Windows version does?

  21. Re:I don't know how by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    RedHat was just bought by IBM. While IBM supports Linux they do tend to mess things up. So maybe the next popular server distro will be Microsoft Linux in a few years? You never know, it could happen.

  22. Other way around by qzzpjs · · Score: 1

    I wish they'd go the other way and port fuser to Windows! I am so tired of Windows telling me I cannot unplug my USB drives because something is using them. But finding that something is almost impossible since process explorer either doesn't see it or just returns svchost. There's about 30 svchost processes running and no one knows what they're being used for.

    1. Re:Other way around by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      > I am so tired of Windows telling me I cannot unplug my USB drives because something is using them. But finding that something is almost impossible since process explorer either doesn't see it or just returns svchost

      --More than likely, it is a virus scanner that is holding the drive hostage. One way around this is to get a USB drive that has a hardware-level write-lock switch such as Kanguru provides. Yanking the drive when it is doing a read operation shouldn't hurt it (CHKDSK if necessary), but everyone should have a backup of their USB drives justincase.

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
  23. This is one step, not the goal. Someone got confus by raymorris · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think there are two possible explanations for this.

    Most likely:
    The boss figured out there is no reason for Microsoft to keep developing their own kernel when they can just slap their UI on top of Linux. The boss said "port the system internals to Linux". A programmer got confused and ported SysInternals", the toolkit for seeing the system internals.

    Also likely:

    The eventual goal is to switch the system internals to Linux.
    In Agile fashion, Microsoft figured they'd start with a bite-sizdd chunk work that feels like it might be kinda going in that direction. It won't actually be used in the end, because it wasn't planned out, it was Scrumed.

  24. No. Sysinternals can do this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you look to the presentations you will see an MS Cloud Models. Scott Guthrie
      is making the effort to help Linux user transition to MS Cloud.
    The Linux tool debug cannot sharing the result to Microsoft, but the Sysinternals can do this.

  25. Why? by DarkOx · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wouldn't it be easier to make a nice gtk front end for strace or something?

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  26. Re:Easing Windows Admins to the Truth by iggymanz · · Score: 1

    are you kidding, the ones that know powershell have mastered the most complicated programming language on planet earth!

  27. First they ignore you, then write the history. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So does that make Linux a monoculture since it's the winners that write history?

    1. Re:First they ignore you, then write the history. by mackul · · Score: 1

      So does that make Linux a monoculture since it's the winners that write history?

      Just in case you're reading slashdot and have some connection to IT, you should be able to know that Linux cannot become or me a "monoculture", because there are so many "flavours" of it. Do you remember the famous Microsoft poster against that diversity in Linux which would be dangerous? https://www.armoredpenguin.com... Today, that poster would have to show a dozen or so more penguins: from a small one (for Raspi, e.g.) up to the mammuth or whale version running on the world's largest supercomputers.

  28. Re:I don't know how by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With SysInternalsD?

  29. Top needed porting too by cruff · · Score: 1

    At one point top needed to be ported to Linux too.

  30. When anyone utters M$ & Linux in the same brea by Hallux-F-Sinister · · Score: 1

    It’s. A. Trick.

    Get an axe.

    --
    Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
  31. OpenBSD is our last refuge for now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linus is polite, M$ embraces the (GNU/)Linux "Cancer".
    Ragnarok has surely arrived.

    All hands to https://www.openbsd.org/

    aaaaand.. Free Loki!

  32. ...then you win by NikeHerc · · Score: 1

    "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

    From Eric Raymond, speaking of open source, and quoting Gandhi.

    --
    Circle the wagons and fire inward. Entropy increases without bounds.
  33. Which GUI library? by tepples · · Score: 1

    Part of it depends on which GUI library you expect the Python program to use to elicit commands from the user and present results to the user. Out of the box, Python ships with only Tkinter, which can't even handle Unicode code points outside the basic multilingual plane. (See for example bug 30019 and the other bugs that its comment by Terry J. Reedy cites.) I imagine a lot of users would prefer something made with wxWidgets, GTK, or Qt.

  34. Why this is a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I understand there is a lot of skepticism about this, but I think this is great for the Linux community. While long-time Linux users will never use these tools, it makes the transition cost for the top-tier Windows users a lot smaller.

    Most of the stereotypical Windows sysadmins have no idea what these tools are. Their standard troubleshooting involves rebooting, rebuilding, trying some magic registry key that once fixed another problem. Those users will stay in their comfort zone.

    The Windows users that understand how an operating system works and truly understand how to use various tools to analyze a problem and troubleshoot it will be able to make the transition. Sure they will use the tools they are familiar with first, but these are the personality types that will adapt. They will not be the proponents to move more Linux into legacy enterprise environments. Many will become valuable contributors to the community.

    1. Re:Why this is a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sysinternal's was open source software. MS bought it lock stock and barrel and then took it private.

      so, a re-release eleven years later... after MS has used all those open soucre proggies for it's linux patent store. you will excuse me but i smell a licence fee grab.

    2. Re:Why this is a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Windows users that understand how an operating system works and truly understand how to use various tools to analyze a problem and troubleshoot it will be able to make the transition. Sure they will use the tools they are familiar with first, but these are the personality types that will adapt.

      Why? I would think most people who use sysinternals for Windows who are the adaptive type that you suggest realize that those tools work for Windows because Windows is Windows. Using Linux tools on Windows, especially of the instrumentation kind, make little sense. The reverse is true with Windows tools on Linux. Using something familiar even though it's substantially inferior is precisely not the mindset of the people you suggest.

      In fact, I'd seriously argue it must be the first group, the stereotypical Windows sysadmin, who would use those tools. Yes, their troubleshooting approach might change little, but they may use those tools to figure out if they should reboot or rebuild or follow some magic cmdline thing off the internet. That's precisely the group Microsoft wants to avoid actually learning Linux because they'll learn that Linux is a much better platform for administrating* en masse even if it has a higher learning curve.

      * GUIs definitely have their place, but prioritizing GUI first and CLI second means de-prioritizing scripting which is the bread and butter of a lot of mass administration. Yes, MS can do both and clearly has tried to push CLI hard, but it's patently clear it's second tier even now. The joke being that one can just script a GUI to recreate a lot of the functionality of sysinternals tools in *nix.

    3. Re:Why this is a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that's one view.

      Another view is a whole new generation of sysadmins will grow up using windows tools on Linux and not understanding the difference. Microsoft will provide plenty of "Linux training" that really only teaches them how to use Microsoft tools from Linux. There will forever be issues where the same tool "just works in Windows" but has un-documented quirks in Linux. New developers comping to Linux will focus on improving the Windows tools. In the end, all those newly "Certified" Linux admins will naturally push for a proper Windows environment when the Boss asks for purchasing guidance.

      This is about as "extend" as "extend" gets. It's a proven business plan.

  35. at least MS already has a head start by denis-The-menace · · Score: 1

    WinInternals (old name for Sysinternals) had a FileMon for Linux.
    I still have my copy.

    --
    Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
  36. Re:When anyone utters M$ & Linux in the same b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, it's great.

    Now all I have to do is have HR ask a potential candidate if they know how to use sysinternals for Linux. If the answer is yes, then we can take a pass without even bothering anyone on the tech team.

  37. Re:I don't know how by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RedHat was just bought by IBM. While IBM supports Linux they do tend to mess things up. So maybe the next popular server distro will be Microsoft Linux in a few years? You never know, it could happen.

    They already made a Unix & lost. Remember Microsoft XENIX & SCO?

    https://web.archive.org/web/20060901182630/http://www.computersourcemag.com/articles/viewer.asp?a=695

  38. Re:This is one step, not the goal. Someone got con by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > The boss figured out there is no reason for Microsoft to keep developing their own kernel when they can just slap their UI on top of Linux. The boss said "port the system internals to Linux".

    How confused would this website be if that happened? Would we finally declare it the year of Linux on the desktop, or would we gnash our teeth about Microsoft being in the end stage of the "embrace, extend, extinguish" strategy?

  39. or you could just use top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    time to get rid of the top command and begin diddling my vag to sysinternals?

  40. It's a trap! by kbg · · Score: 1

    It's a trap!

  41. BSoD screensaver? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real question should be: will they port the infamous BSoD screensaver?

  42. Re: This is one step, not the goal. Someone got co by SirSlud · · Score: 1

    Everyone here is dumber for having read your theory.

    --
    "Old man yells at systemd"
  43. Extend?-supersizing fantasies. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But this time it could be MS that gets extinguished...

    They're going to stop writing software? Never mind they have a big presence in hardware, and services. Microsoft will outlive most fantasies about them dying.

  44. MS bought SysInternals in july of 07... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    you know when MS first "bought" sysinternals a long time ago ... it created the dilema for open source / closed source. Why? Well that's easy. Sysinternal's was already linux based and free!

    so MS now wants to release sysinternals ...

    would anyone like a complete copy of sysinternals ... i still have a few thumb drives with the open source linux software and the new MS owned version. Yes I was there back then...

    ps
    get off my lawn!

    i think i'll visit a torrent site and upload ...

  45. Re:This is one step, not the goal. Someone got con by LostMyAccount · · Score: 1

    I kind of wonder if Microsoft actually *has* considered this and how much work it would actually take to port the UI to Linux. I'm guessing at some point it's a weird bastard with just the kernal calls swapped but most of the shared code still in external dynamic libraries.

  46. Embrace, extend, extinguish. by WindBourne · · Score: 0

    Learn these words.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Embrace, extend, extinguish. by eneville · · Score: 1

      Learn these words.

      I don't see how EEE[1] applies here, though I don't know how it applies since unless it is GPL'd it'll never find its way into core distros.

      1: fun fact, it's roughly the 20th anniversary of the Halloween documents.

      --
      Why UNIX?
    2. Re:Embrace, extend, extinguish. by TooTechy · · Score: 1

      EEE works by allowing users to experience a consistent set of tools across platforms. These tools, over a long period of time, will dumb down a generation of users. After some time, you allow the quality of the tools on one platform to slip somewhat. Just a little. At that point the other platform starts to become slightly more preferable. No. Everyone wont switch to Windows. But there would be some who will.

    3. Re:Embrace, extend, extinguish. by eneville · · Score: 1

      Isn't that what WSL gave Windows folk?

      --
      Why UNIX?
  47. to discuss it before starting it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will be sysinternals GPLv2 or GPLv3 or propietary?

    In theory, the hardware access is privileged and can't used directly from userland space, only from kernel.

    For working sysinternals, it requires code for open gate to the kernel. This code should be GPLv2.

    There are many existent tools for linux as /proc/cpuinfo, lsusb, lsscsi, lspci, etc.

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

    Avoid Linux on Microsoft or Microsoft on Linux. For more than 20 years they've been openly hostile towards unixes even though Windows wouldn't exist on the modern-day internet without Berkley Sockets or Berkley's networking stack. They only take from open source and monetize. They do not give back.

  49. Who's driving this truck? by ellbee · · Score: 1

    Hmmm.... the author of SysInternals (many, many years ago) is the CTO of Azure - coincidence?

    --

    You can't fight in here - this is the war room!

  50. x64 first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    porting all remaining to x64, first, please

  51. This is SO deep into Coals to Newcastle territory. by outlander · · Score: 1

    Umm, Linux must need this because there's a complete dearth of tools for performing diagnostics on Linux and *NIX platforms.

    It's heartbreaking how Linux SAs just don't have any choices of tools. Poor things.....they will welcome this new gift from our Corporate Masters! ;)

    --
    "Truth is what works" -- William James "It works!!" -- o-dark-AM comment
  52. ps and top already exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not much to do.

  53. But there are already equivalents. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    maybe making better gui tools of those.

  54. Re:Easing Windows Admins to the Truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are you kidding, the ones that know powershell have mastered the most complicated programming language on planet earth!

    PowerShell is fucking easy, try Haskell or Rust; PowerShell provides simple C# integration too. Oh, we were talking scripting languages? Then, try C-shell?

  55. Re:This is one step, not the goal. Someone got con by eneville · · Score: 1

    How confused would this website be if that happened? Would we finally declare it the year of Linux on the desktop, or would we gnash our teeth about Microsoft being in the end stage of the "embrace, extend, extinguish" strategy?

    I think linux has done EEE to MS. You now have WSL, there's a better console now, powershell is on Linux, it even has a solitaire clone. I mean the Windows clone is good, but its not as good as the Linux one.

    --
    Why UNIX?
  56. sysinternals pre ms dump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so in july of 2005 ms bought the source and rights to an open source collection of tools.

    that single action branched the toolset. It created the closed source ms toolset and it left intact the open source toolset... this link takes you to the complete pre ms toolsuite
    https:// www.megaupload.us/Tdi/SYSinternals-ALL-July2005.tar.gz

    ps
    remove the space

    1. Re:sysinternals pre ms dump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yeah I'll trust that!

  57. Re:Easing Windows Admins to the Truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do not, for the love of God, use C-shell. At least brainfuck has consistent syntax.

  58. Dr. Mark Russinovich & MS see the light! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: MS sees it just as I did porting my hosts program to Linux https://it.slashdot.org/commen...

    * Why? Linux IS really, Really, REALLY GOOD now - finally!

    (Soon it'll be even BETTER once XArrays (yes, from an MS guy too) get put into Linux as well...)

    In fact, it's SO good now? I've decided to STAY on it from now on - good stuff, does all I need to do, & FREE (vs. payware).

    APK

    P.S.=> Took me MANY years of retrying Linux (1994,1999 & 2010 on Slackware 1.02, Redhat & KUbuntu 10.10 respectively) for it to get to a stage where I personally feel it's good & it is now & the development tool I use in FreePascal 3.0.4-3/Lazarus IDE 1.8.4 = excellent (perfect clones of ObjectPascal Delphi commandset & IDE - best dev tool EVER made) along w/ KUbuntu 18.04 LTS fully patched on KDE Plasma 5.12.x latest (both excellent too)... apk

    1. Re:Dr. Mark Russinovich & MS see the light! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey retard you said all that previously.

  59. cmd.exe by trb · · Score: 2

    Oh gee, while they're in the neighborhood, I hope they port CMD.EXE to Linux. Sometimes a hacker just gotta get his DOS on.

  60. Re:I don't know how by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That Android phone? MS makes something from each and every one of those

    What? How?

  61. not being a windows guy... by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    Sorry but not being a Windows guy I have to ask:
    What does sysinternals bring to the party that we can't already achieve with existing Linux-based tools?

  62. Re:This is one step, not the goal. Someone got con by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When sneeze farts, it produces something that resembles MS Windows, only more appealing.

  63. It would be stupid not to. But how seriously? by raymorris · · Score: 1

    It seems to me that since high-quality free kernels are available, it would be stupid to NOT spend a few minutes considering the option. They must have thought about it *a little bit*. How seriously they considered / consider it is the question.

  64. Re:This is one step, not the goal. Someone got con by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    with the exception of Winamp:

    I mean the Windows *anything* is good, but its not as good as the Linux one.

    FTFY

  65. Re:Even Dr. Mark Russinovich & MS see the ligh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It took you many years because you are a retard, but even now you still need the version of Linux that has training wheels.

  66. What "notware" is that of yours? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: You said you did a ware you wrote all by yourself & you had "MILLION$", lol - not: So, where is it? It's not. HOTAIRWARE!

    APK

    P.S.=> Keep stalking me so I can toss that in your face lol - please, RoTfLmAo @ U (& so is anyone else reading - they did there too)... apk

  67. Come on BIG TALKER (all talk) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LMAO @U https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... where IS it?

    APK

    P.S.=> You blowhard bullshit liar... apk

  68. Typical Douche Unix Answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, SysInternals is awesome, and if you knew anything you'd know that. But no, you have to trash good stuff along with the bad, which just makes you an unreliable douche.

    It's not that Microsoft doesn't have problems and functional gaps. It's that they have good stuff too and you can't (or won't) acknowledge it. Another problem of the Linux/Unix douches? They cannot acknowledge that there are systemic problems with their corner of the tech universe too, only fawning adoration is possible to the douche.