Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Microsoft Teams Is Coming To Linux

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by tildearrow View Post
    Eventually, I'm sure there will be one day where Phoronix will post an article about "Microsoft Windows is coming to Linux".
    I really have this feeling that they'll replace the Windows kernel at some point and adopt Linux.
    Pretty much the most naive thing I've read today. Microsoft isn't open source friendly. They are turning Linux into a run time layer with WSL so you can run your Linux software on your (legaly licenced) windows kernel where it will transmit all your user data to them to profile.

    Comment


    • #22
      Lol, guys. Microsoft is in dire need of a kernel overhaul. Google is developing the modern Fuchsia micro-kernel OS architecture, the NT kernel won’t scale for another decade. And another thing what MS needs to do is to cut off legacy stuff. They tried this with Windows 8’s 'Metro UI' which led to Metro-only Windows tablets. This approach failed. But they are working on a new more modern Windows architecture. Basically a Windows like ChromeOS. This might succeed in a couple years, at least in some segments. This might be the way MS is moving its userbase away from the classical Win32 ecosystem to something different. And on this new platform, they can throw in a new kernel much easier. That’s the way Fuchsia is going to replace Linux beneath Android in time. And Linux, Linux isn’t there yet. Google has some good arguments for developing a new OS design. Linux can adopt some of its new architecture and possibly will, but there will be much legacy stuff they won’t be able to dismiss.
      Last edited by holunder; 09-09-2019, 05:50 PM.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by holunder View Post
        Lol, guys. Microsoft is in dire need of a kernel overhaul. Google is developing the modern Fuchsia micro-kernel OS architecture, the NT kernel won’t scale for another decade. And another thing what MS needs to do is to cut off legacy stuff. They tried this with Windows 8’s 'Metro UI' which led to Metro-only Windows tablets. This approach failed. But they are working on a new more modern Windows architecture. Basically a Windows like ChromeOS. This might succeed in a couple years, at least in some segments. This might be the way MS is moving its userbase away from the classical Win32 ecosystem to something different. And on this new platform, they can throw in a new kernel much easier. That’s the way Fuchsia is going to replace Linux beneath Android in time. And Linux, Linux isn’t there yet. Google has some good arguments for developing a new OS design. Linux can adopt some of its new architecture and possibly will, but there will be much legacy stuff they won’t be able to dismiss.
        Why? FreeBSD's kernel is 40 years old and it still out preforms most OS's.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by k1e0x View Post

          Pretty much the most naive thing I've read today. Microsoft isn't open source friendly. They are turning Linux into a run time layer with WSL so you can run your Linux software on your (legaly licenced) windows kernel where it will transmit all your user data to them to profile.
          Is WSL illegal?

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by soulsource View Post
            And I bet if you ask the business side why they prefer Teams over Slack, they will answer with "It's from Microsoft, so it's clearly the better product. What do you mean with the question if we ever tried Slack and made an objective comparison? It's not from Microsoft, so it's clearly the inferior product."
            Familiarity with the vendor is certainly a big part of it. Other factors include:
            • What the rest of the individuals' departments/teams are using (if you're in HR and everyone else in HR uses one thing, it's hard to use something else)
            • Built-in integration with other MS products
            • A built in Dark Mode (seriously Slack, no built-in dark mode in 2019? not everyone has the patience to modify JS files to manually add one every update)
              • (Arch has slack-desktop-dark, which works well, but that obviously doesn't do much good for our users on Windows)
            • Cost (Teams is a part of an O365 package that our corporate users have anyway, vs Slack which is technically an additional expense)
            So while Slack has a cleaner interface (IMHO), better cross-platform support, custom plugins/add-ons for additional functionality, etc Teams is still competitive in certain areas.


            EDIT [2019-11-06]
            A few days after this post, Slack released dark mode for desktop!
            Last edited by lectrode; 11-06-2019, 04:32 PM.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by k1e0x View Post

              Pretty much the most naive thing I've read today. Microsoft isn't open source friendly. They are turning Linux into a run time layer with WSL so you can run your Linux software on your (legaly licenced) windows kernel where it will transmit all your user data to them to profile.
              Usually tongue in cheek comments appear to be naive to those who take them literally.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by kpedersen View Post
                All that is left then is to ridicule users rejecting it (such as IBM/RedHat is doing with the Devuan community) and then Microsoft is almost completely in control of consumer Linux.
                Really Devuan case is simple
                https://devuan.org/os/init-freedom/
                Each of them is a portable, compatible, small, fast, and secure alternative to systemd.
                This single line should be enough with Devuan to make you break down laughing. Most people don't see what the joke is. Its a stupid impossible statement

                Init systems portable does not equal secure. Why because coding portable means you don't use the host kernel features to be-secure.

                portable, compatible, small, fast would be possible. But lets go down Devuan init offering. Secure is wrong.

                sysvinit is based around pid files to tracking services and messaging. This is broken for process tracking due to PID recycling and why Linux has just added files for process ids for messaging. So sysvinit is insecure as it will at times kill the wrong process that might result in a DOS or equal problem. So this is insecure and broken.

                sinit has no service management so it cannot really start up a modern day server alone. The developer of that recommends Daemontools-encore this depend on posix set session (setsid) that does not in fact work exactly right on Linux because sid like pid can be recycled and processes can decide to change their own session id so disassociate themselves with parent so process leak. So that combination is insecure and broken. Of course deamontools-encore might be fixed once its basically just a front end for openrc. Question why not just use openrc then instead of having this???

                runit interest enough this is also exactly like the sinit/daemontools-encore only chance to fix this so proceses cannot leak from service management is integrate with openrc. So runit is another insecure option.

                openrc cgroup feature is not fully working. This feature is required to prevent openrc leaking service processes. Once openrc does work it will have sections in it configuration file that are not portable and will depend on Linux kernels newer than X versions. So far I have not found a single secure init included because there is not one. Yet Devuan goes head and claims bull crap.

                Not a single include init system that in fact is secure. The include one that could come secure is not going to remain portable.

                Lets look on the 2 on the consideration list of inits.

                s6 another one based on deamontools idea has the same deamontools fault that is fixed by integrating with openrc with cgroup support. Again why not just go with openrc???

                Shepherd from GNU could in fact work but its not include in Devuan at this time.

                Lets say we go with what is possible by dropping portable. compatible, small, fast and secure and we weed out the init systems Devuan to give what that promise. The result would be 2 competitor init systems. Openrc and Shepherd. After you have openrc working then you can revisit s6 and runit. sinit core pid1 is not smaller than the openrc one so it really make no sense and Deamontools-encore really needs openrc to work right.

                This is why Devuan is a joke its not Redhat people hating them. Its anyone who understand the state init systems know that the Devuan promise is bogus dangerous crap so they need to be threat like a joke. I will stop considering Devuan a joke once they get real and start promising what can be delivered.

                If Devuan developers were focused on init systems that could deliver openrc and shepherd might be something competitive right now.

                There is no point having lofty ideals with no way of achieving them. Worse is promising lofty ideals like Devuan and providing a false road to no where to achieve them.

                Comment


                • #28
                  I hope they use qt5 for that.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by Azrael5 View Post
                    finally microsoft begins to develop its own linux Os so many linux distributions will end because they are pure garbage.
                    Finaly Microsoft Windows will end, because it's pure garbage.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by oiaohm View Post
                      Really Devuan case is simple
                      https://devuan.org/os/init-freedom/

                      This single line should be enough with Devuan to make you break down laughing. Most people don't see what the joke is. Its a stupid impossible statement
                      Well, I had to repair enough systems that got brought down thanks to systemd. If a simple typo or something you forget in an init file can make systemd bring your system down, or one of the daemons it should keep alive breaks down and then systemd starts killing your system with no throttling or whatsoever, then how good is it. It takes a long time before systemd comes close as being as stable as sysv-init. And don't give me the windows users mentality "works for me just reinstall your system". Even the init replacement in OS-X works more stable.
                      There are certain features about systemd that are ok. At least the ntp replacement works with IPv6-link-local, so that's a big+.
                      But anyway, nice trolling, I took the bait.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X