I concur. Linux should be easy. FOSS advocates need to look deeply into Munich's decision to switch back to Windows, figure out what all their pain points were and work towards reducing or elliminating them.
But as you see in the comments here, it's not Linux's fault, Linux is awesome and perfect. This is all a Microsoft conspiracy so the complaints about application compatibility must be all lies.
The problem is much of the Linux community has the Steve Jobs Antennagate attitude, if it's not working just blame the user. Just look at the shit I had to go through when putting Linux on my iMac just to get the bluetooth keyboard and mouse working, Windows worked just fine out of the box. If you want to install the latest nvidia drivers you have to ctrl+alt+f7 to get into a TTY then login, find out what your DM service is called, then work out which service manager you are using (maybe the command is service, maybe it is systemctl, stop that services, install the drivers and then restart the service and switch back to graphical terminal. You can say these are niche things but desktop computing is made up of these sorts of niche things, otherwise we'd all just use iPads to do web browsing and email.
Linux is extremely powerful and for the most part very well engineered but people don't care about operating systems, they care about whether they can run their programs and until Linux distros catch up to the usability and hardware/software compatibility of macOS and Windows it isn't going to be widely adopted on the desktop.
This is certainly an achievable thing, Google demonstrated this with Android on smartphones so it certainly isn't outside the realm of possibility.
I am always suspicious of things like this because someone is probably getting paid by Microsoft (nothing as obvious as cash, more like items of tangible value) to do the switch.
Also, first post?:)
Their reasons certainly seem to make sense though, lack of application compatibility is the main reason the vast majority of desktop users use Windows over other operating systems, next is macOS which is in line with application compatibility.
Yes you could migrate and port all your workflows to systems available on Linux, you could build alternative applications when something appropriate didn't exist on the platform and contribute to existing projects (by way of monetary or development effort) to have them add the features you need but this is non-trivial.
In theory it is a great idea to be platform agnostic, in reality it isn't that simple.
Sorry, if Copperhead is an OS based on Linux, then Copperhead must be GPL
No that's not correct. Android is an OS based on Linux and it is not GPL. The kernel is GPL but the rest of the OS is under various other licenses including Apache. The Linux kernel COPYING file explicitly states that programs that use the kernel via normal system calls do not constitute derived works under the GPL.
wouldn't it make more sense for MS and Google to adopt that technology or something compatible?
You mean like an open standard that allows products from different companies to interoperate? Apple doesn't license Airdrop or Airplay or Facetime because doing so would allow people to easily use devices from other manufacturers.
It's that simple. People want to view content and issues of availability, cost, censorship, convenience figure into individual choice as to whether one uses the app and how one uses to the app.
I have no problem with paying content creators for the work they do, indeed I subscribe to a number of streaming services, but very often those factors (particularly availability) that you mention come into play. I can watch something when I'm in North America but then when I travel to the UK I can't watch it. Those sorts of restrictions mean people just turn to piracy, it's not necessarily a lack of willingness to pay, it's a lack of willingness of the content provider to offer that option. Somebody else offers that option, the fact that it costs nothing isn't really the point.
Windows 10 can somehow figure out if i'm using my laptop with a 4k 27" screen, or with a 1600x1200 21" screen (I have the 21" at work). Once logged in, the scaling matches between both screens. It "just works". Ubuntu has *never* done this, on any screen setup i've had.
Windows used to be fucking terrible at this and the only one that seemed to do a good job of it was OSX but Windows 10 certainly does seem to have gotten it sorted for the most part, obviously the various application GUI frameworks makes it somewhat more challenging but it's getting better and better. Still haven't found a Linux DWM that handles this well (perhaps there is one though?), though then there is the problem of even more GUI frameworks on Linux than there are on Windows or Mac.
Well that was the whole point of the Pro models. Yes most users like yourself (based on the specifications of your Surface) would do just fine with the Macbook Air, the Pro was the one for those people who required a higher performance machine for their use cases. If they aren't providing that then what's the point of Pro model at all?
Apple is always going to say whatever their new thing is is the way of the future, they are pretty much obligated to say that. Whether that is the G4 Cube, the Trashcan Mac, Magsafe, Firewire, styluses (styli?), the port-variationless Macbooks or iPhone face unlock but ultimately it is up to the customers to make the distinction whether that is true or not. The rabid fanboys will defend whatever they do and whatever they say anyway but ultimately they are a for-profit corporation and the market decides when they backpeddle and when they don't.
Some things have turned out to indeed be the way of the future, some haven't and some we don't yet know. It's obviously ridiculous to defend and parrot that XYZ is the way of the future just because Apple (or any company or person for that matter) says it is when they are trying to sell it to you.
Yeah, the local government provides a service where you tell them where you're going to dig and they get back to you with the locations and depths of nearby services.
Really the only thing I was saying is that the 10 guys with shovels are replaced by one guy with an backhoe. And yes there is a lot more that goes into an operation like that in either case.
611 what? That must just be a thing where you live. The only thing I need to worry about is if it is over a certain tonnage I would need an operator's license but I've never needed to hire anything that big.
you've got permits if you're in a residential area
No, no need for permits. Again maybe an issue with your local government.
you've got a whole lot of fucking shit.
You mean you're running out of things to list. No it's not the big deal you think it is.
Well it makes sense that a logical way to do it would be through practical application. i.e. write code that you can execute.
Where I am skeptical is that I don't think there's a single notation that is simple and clear for everybody, or that can express the concepts of every field in a simple and clear manner.
I think it's pretty clear that there isn't one, that's why we have so many programming languages but we don't eschew say MATLAB or Mathematica in education just because it isn't all things to all people in all fields.
You can argue it's all too hard if you want but in the end if they do something and it provides at least some value then that's good even if it isn't the non-existent (or undiscovered) perfect solution.
A backhoe, an overpaid operator, contracted maintenance, financing for said backhoe, fancy accountant at the home office to deal with a depreciating asset, fleet supervisor to manage company cars for the job site foreman. Insurance for the machine, a CDC driver to deliver the big equipment, ooh, another depreciating capital expense - the truck, more insurance for the truck, Drug testing for operators, Yep, just a backhoe is all anyone needs.
No I just go out, hire a backhoe and do the job as opposed to hiring a team of people to do it in a longer time. You're clearly doing it wrong, I want to dig a hole and you think that involves me somewhere along the line having - among other things - a fleet of company cars.
Well you are wrong, it's not "their" programs... it's Microsoft's program.
What's Microsoft's program? You mean the operating system? The operating system is the thing that runs programs. The usefulness of an operating system is dependent on its ability to run the programs the user wants/needs to run.
All these assholes here saying they are looking to switch OS because of a single application are just putting on bravado and ultimately won't do shit.
Who is saying they would switch OS because of a single application? And what is that application that is causing them to switch?
Perhaps they could consider working on a good phone OS and ignoring the "apps"? For example: I'm a grown-up. I don't use "apps".
By "apps" do you mean you don't use programs? Or did you put it in quotations because you mean something else?
I have a few different messenger apps (because not everyone uses just phone and email to communicate), a home automation one, remote security camera viewer, VPN, a couple of video streaming services for the occasional on-the-go entertainment, spotify app, maps and a bluetooth mouse one. With the built in calendar, phone, camera, browser, notes, reminders and email apps that pretty much covers my usage.
Of course everybody is different and Im sure many use theirs as little more than a gaming device but I doubt that many people use purely phone and email though if that's your total use case then pretty much any smartphone is perfectly fine for you.
If it's the same codebase, then no special work is needed for Windows 10 Mobile, it gets carried forward by work on Windows 10.
It's not the same codebase, that's why it is called Windows 10 Mobile and not simply Windows 10.
If it's the same codebase, then there is no "apps shortage", every Metro app written since Windows 8 should work just fine. That was the point of Metro, no?
The point is people don't want to use Windows for Metro 'apps', the advantage of Windows is in its use as a workstation and enthusiast gaming platform (by that I mean custom configurations, highend hardware, various combinations of control mechanisms, VR, etc), neither of which transition well to Metro apps running on mobile devices. We already have platforms for running mobile apps and they do it just fine: Android and iOS. Windows Mobile offers no compelling advantage over the incumbents so nobody wants to use it or develop for it. The OS itself is fine, but there are many fine operating systems that people don't use because they offer less application compatibility with no disruptive advantage in an already established market.
Unfortunately, that's not the choice. The choice is "an OS that runs the software I have to use" and "an OS that doesn't run the software I have to use."
This is exactly right. People don't care about the operating system, they care about being able to run their programs. That is the whole point of an operating system, if it can't do that then it isn't even an option.
Why is this bad for Microsoft? They are adapting to that change rather than fighting it and risking becoming irrelevant. Windows has been made more touch-friendly and they even got to the point of creating their own tablet hardware to demonstrate would could be done and Office has gone from being Windows & Mac to being available across the spectrum of consumer computing platforms including Android, ChromeOS, iPhone, iPad and pretty much any device with a web browser through Office365.
Take the iPhone X, it has four high performance cores at ~2.5GHz which drives a bigger-than-FullHD 2436x1125 screen, has 3GB of RAM, a very fast NVME SSD and so on. Is anyone in doubt it could be a quite solid desktop if they let it?
Even a low end core i3 from 3 years ago can do 3 times that resolution with its onboard GPU and dirt cheap laptops come with 4GB of RAM these days.
How is this related to WSL? AFAIK, WSL doesn't do graphics at all.
The idea is to avoid dual booting, I could run Windows with WSL to run the majority of Linux programs and VMWare Workstation if I need to run Linux programs with hardware acceleration. My question is can you go the other way and run Linux as the OS.
Like applications, drivers are not a part of any OS.
Yes but as is stated on the AOSP page you can see that you cannot use it without them, what you build to actually use is not built solely from open source but from a combination of open source and proprietary pieces.
Slashdot Mirror
I concur. Linux should be easy. FOSS advocates need to look deeply into Munich's decision to switch back to Windows, figure out what all their pain points were and work towards reducing or elliminating them.
But as you see in the comments here, it's not Linux's fault, Linux is awesome and perfect. This is all a Microsoft conspiracy so the complaints about application compatibility must be all lies.
The problem is much of the Linux community has the Steve Jobs Antennagate attitude, if it's not working just blame the user. Just look at the shit I had to go through when putting Linux on my iMac just to get the bluetooth keyboard and mouse working, Windows worked just fine out of the box. If you want to install the latest nvidia drivers you have to ctrl+alt+f7 to get into a TTY then login, find out what your DM service is called, then work out which service manager you are using (maybe the command is service, maybe it is systemctl, stop that services, install the drivers and then restart the service and switch back to graphical terminal. You can say these are niche things but desktop computing is made up of these sorts of niche things, otherwise we'd all just use iPads to do web browsing and email.
Linux is extremely powerful and for the most part very well engineered but people don't care about operating systems, they care about whether they can run their programs and until Linux distros catch up to the usability and hardware/software compatibility of macOS and Windows it isn't going to be widely adopted on the desktop.
This is certainly an achievable thing, Google demonstrated this with Android on smartphones so it certainly isn't outside the realm of possibility.
I am always suspicious of things like this because someone is probably getting paid by Microsoft (nothing as obvious as cash, more like items of tangible value) to do the switch.
Also, first post? :)
Their reasons certainly seem to make sense though, lack of application compatibility is the main reason the vast majority of desktop users use Windows over other operating systems, next is macOS which is in line with application compatibility.
Yes you could migrate and port all your workflows to systems available on Linux, you could build alternative applications when something appropriate didn't exist on the platform and contribute to existing projects (by way of monetary or development effort) to have them add the features you need but this is non-trivial.
In theory it is a great idea to be platform agnostic, in reality it isn't that simple.
Sorry, if Copperhead is an OS based on Linux, then Copperhead must be GPL
No that's not correct. Android is an OS based on Linux and it is not GPL. The kernel is GPL but the rest of the OS is under various other licenses including Apache. The Linux kernel COPYING file explicitly states that programs that use the kernel via normal system calls do not constitute derived works under the GPL.
wouldn't it make more sense for MS and Google to adopt that technology or something compatible?
You mean like an open standard that allows products from different companies to interoperate? Apple doesn't license Airdrop or Airplay or Facetime because doing so would allow people to easily use devices from other manufacturers.
So you've already indicated you have no ethically issue pirating content.
No, I'm saying I'm not an absolutist about it.
Why bother paying for streaming services in the first place?
Because, as I said, I have no problem with paying content creators for the work they do.
Does the pirated version just happen to not be available in the countries where your legal service is?
The only means to get the content in some regions is to pirate it despite it being accessible in other regions.
Or do you not care about shopping for the lowest price?
It's nothing to do with price and everything to do with availability.
It's that simple. People want to view content and issues of availability, cost, censorship, convenience figure into individual choice as to whether one uses the app and how one uses to the app.
I have no problem with paying content creators for the work they do, indeed I subscribe to a number of streaming services, but very often those factors (particularly availability) that you mention come into play. I can watch something when I'm in North America but then when I travel to the UK I can't watch it. Those sorts of restrictions mean people just turn to piracy, it's not necessarily a lack of willingness to pay, it's a lack of willingness of the content provider to offer that option. Somebody else offers that option, the fact that it costs nothing isn't really the point.
It would make sense to still do that now.
Windows 10 can somehow figure out if i'm using my laptop with a 4k 27" screen, or with a 1600x1200 21" screen (I have the 21" at work). Once logged in, the scaling matches between both screens. It "just works". Ubuntu has *never* done this, on any screen setup i've had.
Windows used to be fucking terrible at this and the only one that seemed to do a good job of it was OSX but Windows 10 certainly does seem to have gotten it sorted for the most part, obviously the various application GUI frameworks makes it somewhat more challenging but it's getting better and better. Still haven't found a Linux DWM that handles this well (perhaps there is one though?), though then there is the problem of even more GUI frameworks on Linux than there are on Windows or Mac.
I prefer 4 TB3 ports, than one TB3 and a bunch of other ports.
But if, like you said, you're happy with a hub and that gives you flexibility then what do you need 4 TB3 ports for? 1 is enough.
Well that was the whole point of the Pro models. Yes most users like yourself (based on the specifications of your Surface) would do just fine with the Macbook Air, the Pro was the one for those people who required a higher performance machine for their use cases. If they aren't providing that then what's the point of Pro model at all?
So a non-integrated solution requiring external components being better than an integrated solution that works out of the box?
Apple is always going to say whatever their new thing is is the way of the future, they are pretty much obligated to say that. Whether that is the G4 Cube, the Trashcan Mac, Magsafe, Firewire, styluses (styli?), the port-variationless Macbooks or iPhone face unlock but ultimately it is up to the customers to make the distinction whether that is true or not. The rabid fanboys will defend whatever they do and whatever they say anyway but ultimately they are a for-profit corporation and the market decides when they backpeddle and when they don't.
Some things have turned out to indeed be the way of the future, some haven't and some we don't yet know. It's obviously ridiculous to defend and parrot that XYZ is the way of the future just because Apple (or any company or person for that matter) says it is when they are trying to sell it to you.
so why add complexity and a bunch more points of potential failure
A USB3 port with a USB2 dongle and a USB3 port with a HDMI dongle has more points of failure than just having those ports available.
where a simple port hub would do?
If I want multiple of one port then yes a hub is just fine.
Yeah, the local government provides a service where you tell them where you're going to dig and they get back to you with the locations and depths of nearby services.
Really the only thing I was saying is that the 10 guys with shovels are replaced by one guy with an backhoe. And yes there is a lot more that goes into an operation like that in either case.
Do you mean rent one? Because if so, bullshit.
Yes I do mean rent one, and no not bullshit.
You've got to transport it
It's on a trailer, I just hook it up.
you've got to deal with 611
611 what? That must just be a thing where you live. The only thing I need to worry about is if it is over a certain tonnage I would need an operator's license but I've never needed to hire anything that big.
you've got permits if you're in a residential area
No, no need for permits. Again maybe an issue with your local government.
you've got a whole lot of fucking shit.
You mean you're running out of things to list. No it's not the big deal you think it is.
I don't know if they currently teach it at all.
Well it makes sense that a logical way to do it would be through practical application. i.e. write code that you can execute.
Where I am skeptical is that I don't think there's a single notation that is simple and clear for everybody, or that can express the concepts of every field in a simple and clear manner.
I think it's pretty clear that there isn't one, that's why we have so many programming languages but we don't eschew say MATLAB or Mathematica in education just because it isn't all things to all people in all fields.
You can argue it's all too hard if you want but in the end if they do something and it provides at least some value then that's good even if it isn't the non-existent (or undiscovered) perfect solution.
A backhoe, an overpaid operator, contracted maintenance, financing for said backhoe, fancy accountant at the home office to deal with a depreciating asset, fleet supervisor to manage company cars for the job site foreman. Insurance for the machine, a CDC driver to deliver the big equipment, ooh, another depreciating capital expense - the truck, more insurance for the truck, Drug testing for operators, Yep, just a backhoe is all anyone needs.
No I just go out, hire a backhoe and do the job as opposed to hiring a team of people to do it in a longer time. You're clearly doing it wrong, I want to dig a hole and you think that involves me somewhere along the line having - among other things - a fleet of company cars.
Well you are wrong, it's not "their" programs... it's Microsoft's program.
What's Microsoft's program? You mean the operating system? The operating system is the thing that runs programs. The usefulness of an operating system is dependent on its ability to run the programs the user wants/needs to run.
All these assholes here saying they are looking to switch OS because of a single application are just putting on bravado and ultimately won't do shit.
Who is saying they would switch OS because of a single application? And what is that application that is causing them to switch?
Perhaps they could consider working on a good phone OS and ignoring the "apps"? For example: I'm a grown-up. I don't use "apps".
By "apps" do you mean you don't use programs? Or did you put it in quotations because you mean something else?
I have a few different messenger apps (because not everyone uses just phone and email to communicate), a home automation one, remote security camera viewer, VPN, a couple of video streaming services for the occasional on-the-go entertainment, spotify app, maps and a bluetooth mouse one. With the built in calendar, phone, camera, browser, notes, reminders and email apps that pretty much covers my usage.
Of course everybody is different and Im sure many use theirs as little more than a gaming device but I doubt that many people use purely phone and email though if that's your total use case then pretty much any smartphone is perfectly fine for you.
If it's the same codebase, then no special work is needed for Windows 10 Mobile, it gets carried forward by work on Windows 10.
It's not the same codebase, that's why it is called Windows 10 Mobile and not simply Windows 10.
If it's the same codebase, then there is no "apps shortage", every Metro app written since Windows 8 should work just fine. That was the point of Metro, no?
The point is people don't want to use Windows for Metro 'apps', the advantage of Windows is in its use as a workstation and enthusiast gaming platform (by that I mean custom configurations, highend hardware, various combinations of control mechanisms, VR, etc), neither of which transition well to Metro apps running on mobile devices. We already have platforms for running mobile apps and they do it just fine: Android and iOS. Windows Mobile offers no compelling advantage over the incumbents so nobody wants to use it or develop for it. The OS itself is fine, but there are many fine operating systems that people don't use because they offer less application compatibility with no disruptive advantage in an already established market.
Unfortunately, that's not the choice. The choice is "an OS that runs the software I have to use" and "an OS that doesn't run the software I have to use."
This is exactly right. People don't care about the operating system, they care about being able to run their programs. That is the whole point of an operating system, if it can't do that then it isn't even an option.
Why is this bad for Microsoft? They are adapting to that change rather than fighting it and risking becoming irrelevant. Windows has been made more touch-friendly and they even got to the point of creating their own tablet hardware to demonstrate would could be done and Office has gone from being Windows & Mac to being available across the spectrum of consumer computing platforms including Android, ChromeOS, iPhone, iPad and pretty much any device with a web browser through Office365.
Take the iPhone X, it has four high performance cores at ~2.5GHz which drives a bigger-than-FullHD 2436x1125 screen, has 3GB of RAM, a very fast NVME SSD and so on. Is anyone in doubt it could be a quite solid desktop if they let it?
Even a low end core i3 from 3 years ago can do 3 times that resolution with its onboard GPU and dirt cheap laptops come with 4GB of RAM these days.
How is this related to WSL? AFAIK, WSL doesn't do graphics at all.
The idea is to avoid dual booting, I could run Windows with WSL to run the majority of Linux programs and VMWare Workstation if I need to run Linux programs with hardware acceleration. My question is can you go the other way and run Linux as the OS.
Like applications, drivers are not a part of any OS.
Yes but as is stated on the AOSP page you can see that you cannot use it without them, what you build to actually use is not built solely from open source but from a combination of open source and proprietary pieces.