Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Microsoft Has A Large Presence At This Year's X.Org Conference

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

  • #21
    How feasible is the "extinguish" part for free software though? All of the hardware/software they killed in the 90s was proprietary and commercial. Even if they killed all of the companies who develop and support Linux, the code would still be around for anyone to pick it up again. And they can't just steal/relicense GPL code that was written by others.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by Prescience500 View Post
      Considering how vibrant and independent the Linux ecosystem is, would they even be able to extinguish? I mean, many of the players like Red Hat/IBM, are in and of themselves powerful in their own right.
      This. Microsoft can only slow the growth of Linux, but it cannot be stopped.

      It's too late and Microsoft knows it. EEE is dead. Microsoft instead wants a piece of the pie.

      Microsoft's problem is that the road outward from Windows -------> Linux has been far too easy. So they built a road back inwards the other way. Windows <----------- Linux. Sure, people will use the highway because its clean and there aren't any traffic jams. But the highway out simply has more people on it and it always will.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by angrypie View Post
        How feasible is the "extinguish" part for free software though?
        Why is free software any more resistant than proprietary in this context? Because you can't steal the code? Why bother stealing the code when you can steal the users?
        Last edited by dreich; 09-17-2020, 10:54 AM.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by dreich View Post

          Why is free software any less resistant than proprietary in this context? Because you can't steal the code? Why bother stealing the code when you can steal the users?
          Windows is still 90% of desktops, slightly less on servers (70% or so). Microsoft Office is the "standard" office suite. They already have the upper hand and missed several opportunities of locking out non-Windows OSes from PCs, yet chose not to do so.

          So far we don't know what they truly want. What we know is that marketing bullshit like "building bridges" is obviously bullshit.

          Comment


          • #25
            I definitely don't trust them. I have heard it said that they are shifting from being an OS company to a software company and they may be true. If so, that's the best possible outcome because it would mean that they no longer care about OS because they care more about what they can build on top of it and profit off of that. However, I strongly doubt they would give up their OS crown without a real fight.

            Comment


            • #26
              Ehhh, I'm not very optimistic about this...

              Microsoft trying hard to create 100% operational Linux inside Windows. In theory it is great thing, but the problem is that they are doing NOTHING in opposite direction (I mean no Microsoft contributions about increase Windows compatibility in QEMU/KVM and/or Wine).

              The problem is that when they accomplish it (and Microsoft is very near because of open nature of Linux) - there will be no reason for "average user" to use "bare metal" Linux! Why to brother installing and configuring "bare metal" Linux if the same could be accomplish inside Windows? It is even better from user perspective - on Windows you could launch all Windows AND Linux applications (including 3D acceleration)!

              On Linux - you could launch only some Windows applications via Wine (mostly games but not all and there is plenty of compatibility issues)... The best approach would be start Windows applications in QEMU/KVM - it is almost ideal solution but... there is no 3D acceleration (without GPU passthrough), so many Windows apps and almost all games will not work in such Windows VM...

              I think that Linux community should try do the same what Microsoft is doing. WSL2 in short it is Linux VM with 3D acceleration (using mapping guest OpenGL/Vulkan -> host DirectX12), so Linux community should try create QEMU/KVM driver that will map Windows VM guest DirectX -> Linux host Vulkan. The problem is that probably without Microsoft involvement - it is very hard to implement such driver...

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by JPFSanders View Post

                They want windows developers to stick to windows, and windows centric companies to not bother running on metal linux

                There is a type of modern developer who is lazy and woefully ignorant (they know very little about low level stuff and leverage copy/paste a lot) MS knows this and want to prevent those developers from ever moving to Linux.

                By embracing running Linux on top of windows they keep those developers on an environment that is familiar and works for them.

                Trying to run bare metal Linux is not always straight-forward and requires to learn. Those ILD (Ignorant lazy devs) will feel at home running windows while they leverage whatever Linux has to offer that is unavailable on Windows for the time being.

                MS might not know how to do the extinguish phase yet, but you can count that they're waiting for the right moment and the right opportunity.

                Getting into the action right now getting involved with Linuxland and pretending to be your friend is what they always do to any industry they want to assault.

                What count is not words but actions, what has MS done that benefits the Linux ecosystem at large? so far: NOTHING.

                Always keep in mind, besides themselves, Linux is their only competition left.



                They will never do such a thing, MS only does what is good for MS, and this is what the Linux community/ecosystem should do, do things that are good for Linux, however keeping an eye on not falling into traps from the likes of MS.

                MS has a money printing machine with their stronghold of Exchange, Office and Windows on the desktop which also pushes sales of windows servers, why would they break it?
                You forgot "teams" and skype which IT bootlickers are willing to force upon everyone.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by JPFSanders View Post

                  They want windows developers to stick to windows, and windows centric companies to not bother running on metal linux

                  There is a type of modern developer who is lazy and woefully ignorant (they know very little about low level stuff and leverage copy/paste a lot) MS knows this and want to prevent those developers from ever moving to Linux.

                  By embracing running Linux on top of windows they keep those developers on an environment that is familiar and works for them.

                  Trying to run bare metal Linux is not always straight-forward and requires to learn. Those ILD (Ignorant lazy devs) will feel at home running windows while they leverage whatever Linux has to offer that is unavailable on Windows for the time being.

                  MS might not know how to do the extinguish phase yet, but you can count that they're waiting for the right moment and the right opportunity.

                  Getting into the action right now getting involved with Linuxland and pretending to be your friend is what they always do to any industry they want to assault.

                  What count is not words but actions, what has MS done that benefits the Linux ecosystem at large? so far: NOTHING.

                  Always keep in mind, besides themselves, Linux is their only competition left.



                  They will never do such a thing, MS only does what is good for MS, and this is what the Linux community/ecosystem should do, do things that are good for Linux, however keeping an eye on not falling into traps from the likes of MS.

                  MS has a money printing machine with their stronghold of Exchange, Office and Windows on the desktop which also pushes sales of windows servers, why would they break it?
                  Yes this is exactly right. The only reason you might see some Microsoft software on Linux is to collect advertising data. You will never see full flagship products of theirs like Office or DX12 on Linux. MacOS did get office, but it was a cut down broken version (probably only to keep apple from making something better)

                  EEE 100% it's an old playbook. At the rank and file level maybe many of the employees actually like Linux.. but.. at the corporate level they are a threat. WSL turns Linux into nothing more than a run time layer.

                  Other OS's can do this as well.. Illumos has LX Zones and FreeBSD is fairly close and can run many unmodified Linux binaries already (such as Skype or Steam). The difference is they are open source and are happy to contribute.
                  Last edited by k1e0x; 09-17-2020, 12:41 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by Danniello View Post
                    I think that Linux community should try do the same what Microsoft is doing. WSL2 in short it is Linux VM with 3D acceleration (using mapping guest OpenGL/Vulkan -> host DirectX12), so Linux community should try create QEMU/KVM driver that will map Windows VM guest DirectX -> Linux host Vulkan. The problem is that probably without Microsoft involvement - it is very hard to implement such driver...
                    Yes. This is the work that Microsoft should be involved with. They have access to all the Windows source code. They have access to all the internal documentation. They hold all the keys to making this happen in a much shorter amount of time.

                    WINE has been around for how many decades? How many open source developers have spent their time and effort on WINE? Scroll through the credits list in WINE and it is pretty eye watering how much has been thrown at it over the years. This is the one area where Microsoft could really make themselves useful, but no, they continue to waste time on ridiculous things.

                    Nobody wants to boot Windows and get hit with ransomware, malware, BSODs, poorly tested forced updates that crash the system, etc. Yet this is the path that Microsoft continues to try forcing on their users. It is ridiculous and it will not work in the end. Eventually Linux will supplant Windows OS, just like Android did to the Windows Phone. The sooner Microsoft stops dragging their feet and accept the inevitability of Windows OS being mothballed, the better off they and their users will be.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by ed31337 View Post

                      Yes. This is the work that Microsoft should be involved with. They have access to all the Windows source code. They have access to all the internal documentation. They hold all the keys to making this happen in a much shorter amount of time.

                      WINE has been around for how many decades? How many open source developers have spent their time and effort on WINE? Scroll through the credits list in WINE and it is pretty eye watering how much has been thrown at it over the years. This is the one area where Microsoft could really make themselves useful, but no, they continue to waste time on ridiculous things.

                      Nobody wants to boot Windows and get hit with ransomware, malware, BSODs, poorly tested forced updates that crash the system, etc. Yet this is the path that Microsoft continues to try forcing on their users. It is ridiculous and it will not work in the end. Eventually Linux will supplant Windows OS, just like Android did to the Windows Phone. The sooner Microsoft stops dragging their feet and accept the inevitability of Windows OS being mothballed, the better off they and their users will be.
                      The reason this is much harder and Wine hasn't been more successful is it's a moving target. Microsoft contently changes.. In Linux their API compatibility has been relatively static for a long time now. Microsoft *could* do it but... yeah right.. why would they? They want every computer running Microsoft Windows and Wine isn't needed on Windows.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X