Microsoft Bringing eBPF Support To Windows

[ed31337]

And those of us who're using dual boot are safer, because windows can't screw our Linux' partitions atm.

Don't be so sure. I've had Windows screw up my Linux installations plenty of times. Usually it has to do with simply blowing away the bootloader, but sometimes it can do even worse.

With just a little bit of smarts added to Windows, it could play so much nicer with Linux.

OTOH, these days, I don't even bother installing Windows, so no more worries.

[oiaohm]

And those of us who're using dual boot are safer, because windows can't screw our Linux' partitions atm.

This is true at the moment but you also have to remember windows with updates in the past have screwed over Linux boot loader and other parts so resulting in dual boot failures.

[Charlie68]

what opensource microsoft technology isn't useable in linux environment?

It is quite evident that when Microsoft does not want to release software for other platforms as well, it closes it and releases it as proprietary software. So comfortable! Mind you, Microsoft is a company and it is free to make its own choices, but as an open source Linux user, I don't thank Microsoft and I dare to say that what it takes is more than what it gives.

[smitty3268]

Color me surprised, too:

https://www.sdxcentral.com/articles/...azure/2020/12/

I'm not surprised MS is looking at ARM. That's just common sense.

What will never ever happen is Intel destroying their whole company by sabotaging the platform they sell 90% of their product for.

Intel and MS have been very friendly for decades, that's not changing. Obviously both companies are going to try to hedge their bets and do what's best for them - but deliberately spiting a major friendly company in order to blow up your own business is just a dumb move.

If Intel was going to do anything super-tricksy like that the smarter move would be to allow MS to use their patents under a license only valid for x86 chips, in order to try and screw over ARM. Not MS.

[oiaohm]

If Intel was going to do anything super-tricksy like that the smarter move would be to allow MS to use their patents under a license only valid for x86 chips, in order to try and screw over ARM. Not MS.

Yes that correct to a point. Think little deeper by the time Intel decides todo that Microsoft could have invested in a lot of custom built arm hardware in Azure they cannot use anymore to run Windows services and pay Intel damages for use of item without patents they should have had.

https://www.techzine.eu/news/security/55563/intel-files-lawsuit-against-a-former-employee-now-at-microsoft/

smitty3268 you also need to really think about are Microsoft and Intel still friendly. 2020 we saw this happen back in 2014 another employee went from Intel to Microsoft doing the same things and nothing legal was done. We have seen the relationship from 2014 to now between Microsoft and Intel start deteriorating. Its not as strong as it once was.

What will never ever happen is Intel destroying their whole company by sabotaging the platform they sell 90% of their product for.

Who is the 90% is the good question because that is a bull crap number. 70% of intel cpu sales are not the desktop market but to the Linux dominated server and embedded markets. It surprises a lot of people that Intel could be quite profitable and not sell a single desktop or laptop chip.

If Microsoft actions are going to sabotage Linux development it would be in Intel best long term interest to nuke Microsoft off the face of the earth.

When Microsoft was doing better in the server business the balance was very different than it is today. Its no longer wise to think that Intel is not a threat to Microsoft the buddy buddy relationship is no longer there,

[Volta]

Don't be so sure. I've had Windows screw up my Linux installations plenty of times. Usually it has to do with simply blowing away the bootloader, but sometimes it can do even worse.

With just a little bit of smarts added to Windows, it could play so much nicer with Linux.

OTOH, these days, I don't even bother installing Windows, so no more worries.

Indeed! However, I was more thinking about the spyware aspect of Windows. Better that it doesn't have access to my Linux partitions.

[phuclv]

We need: Microsoft Bringing ______ Partition Support To Windows

(ext2, 3, 4, xfs, btrfs a few others)

you can already do that
Access Linux filesystems in Windows and WSL 2
Get started mounting a Linux disk in WSL 2 (preview)

There's already a winbtrfs.

That's not from MS. For 3rd party drivers there were already many ext2/3/4 drivers in the past like https://github.com/bobranten/Ext4Fsd
There are also many ZFS drivers like https://github.com/dominicusin/zfs-win or https://github.com/openzfsonwindows/ZFSin

[smitty3268]

it would be in Intel best long term interest to nuke Microsoft off the face of the earth.

As I said, this is an incredibly dumb take. You need to separate wishful thinking from reality.

[JackLilhammers]

Who is the 90% is the good question because that is a bull crap number. 70% of intel cpu sales are not the desktop market but to the Linux dominated server and embedded markets. It surprises a lot of people that Intel could be quite profitable and not sell a single desktop or laptop chip.

I'd say your 70% is not so different from his 90%, as you didn't provide any sort of source for your claims.
Here, now you can talk

https://www.intc.com/segments

https://businessquant.com/intel-revenue-by-segment
https://www.statista.com/statistics/495928/net-revenue-of-intel-by-segment/

If Microsoft actions are going to sabotage Linux development it would be in Intel best long term interest to nuke Microsoft off the face of the earth.

Assuming they wanted and they succeded, the next best thing for desktop users would be Apple and for cloud computing Amazon.
Not exactly Intel's best friend lately.
Also for cloud computing it would be Amazon.
It would realy be in Intel best interests to erase Microsoft

Besides, you know Microsoft is nearly twice the size of Intel and twice as rich, right?

[oiaohm]

I'd say your 70% is not so different from his 90%, as you didn't provide any sort of source for your claims.
Here, now you can talk
https://www.intc.com/segments

Those numbers so the best case that 57% of Intel sales are Microsoft. The problem here that is not the true picture those numbers are after Subsidiaries as based of dividend payments and royalties back to the core company. Take a lot more digging and you can only do 3 URL at a time without having to get mod approval. To see the complete picture I would have to put at least 20 URL here. So you can see the income at each of the subsidiaries. Yes it surprising that the number moves by about 30 percent on one hand. IOT why would most of the money for that not return to USA that because most of the design of IOT parts by Intel is not done in the USA and most of the sales are not in the USA or to USA firms. Then not returning the money to the USA results in lower tax and lower wages. You find the same in the data centre where large sections of the work is done outside the USA along with large amount of the sales income not returning to the USA.

Besides, you know Microsoft is nearly twice the size of Intel and twice as rich, right?

Again that depend on what number you look at. The filled with the USA share market or there total including all Subsidiaries. Reality over all their Subsidiaries Microsoft and Intel are about the same size. Microsoft does bring more money back to the USA than Intel does leading to a kind of a false appearance here.

Assuming they wanted and they succeded, the next best thing for desktop users would be Apple and for cloud computing Amazon.

Amazon still sells Windows cloud instances. So Microsoft Windows Server/Desktop comes well supported on ARM this reduces future Intel CPU chip sales to Amazon.

There will come a point where Intel will start looking at the patents they have and go can I ruin/stop Microsoft ARM progress to prevent them damaging our markets.

We are already seeing patent trolls turn up against Apple and Amazon with prior Intel patents. Patent battle turns into a horrible game using shell companies lot of the time so the source of the patent aggression has to take no risk if the patent aggression fails. The worse part is you sometimes see companies settle with the shell company to give the funding to the shell company legally to go after another company they really want to harm. It gets really hard to pick the true attacker in a lot of cases. This is the patent version of a spite house.