1. 28

  2. 25

    “The Linux usage on our cloud has surpassed Windows.” The proportion of Linux workloads looks set to increase with the trend towards Kubernetes, which is primarily a Linux technology. Linux already runs well on Hyper-V with a Windows root partition, but making this a complete Linux stack may improve performance.

    This “lets admit that a Linux fullstack will improve performance” comming from Microsoft is pure gold.

    1. 16

      I fully expect by 2027 that Windows will either be Open Source or will have swapped out the NT kernel for Linux, and Microsoft’s primary products will be cloud-based distributions of Office, a gaming-centric desktop operating system, the Xbox, SQL Server, and cloud services.

      You heard it here first, folks.

      1. 4

        Microsoft’s primary products will be cloud-based distributions of Office

        Isn’t this already the case with O365?

        1. 2

          Right but my implication was that you wouldn’t even be able to buy standalone Office anymore. Maybe that’s already come to pass; I don’t keep tabs on that too much.

          1. 2

            Maybe that’s already come to pass

            Not yet; you can still buy standalone Office 2019 for both Windows and Mac. But yes they clearly are moving away from it. The product page introduces it somewhat condescendingly as a product for “customers who aren’t ready for the cloud”.

        2. 2

          After hearing Brian Cantrill rant about the Linux kernel a billion times, something makes me wonder if we’re missing out by having the Linux kernel be the “winner” here, compared to some more featureful OS kernels.

          Granted he probably has many opinons on this

          1. 2

            I, for one, await the return of glorious Solaris and Solaris Zones

            1. 2

              Linux is generally more featureful than other options. That’s a result of thousands of people banging on it and adding the warts they want for their use cases.

              The downside is that it feels to me like Linux is built out of warts, glued together with workarounds. It’s not a fun codebase to interact with.

            2. 1

              I agree. It is clear that we will, at long last, win the war of Linux vs Windows - but we need to make sure that our victory is not a pyrrhic one.

              1. 13

                but we need to make sure that our victory is not a pyrrhic one.

                Too late!

                The massive footprint of FOSS code, and its centrality to the computing ecosystem as a whole, has arrived largely as a function of its utility to megacorp-scale business in service of utterly defeating the very things that made open code and software freedom attractive and vital propositions to so many of us in the first place. There’re few clearer examples of this than the general role of the Linux kernel and friends in the current software economy.

                We lost by winning, or won by losing, or however you want to frame it. At any rate, ca. 2020 the bad guys are in charge and the end user / subject of computational systems is in the general case basically fucked.

                1. 3

                  I don’t know if the end user is any more fu$%^& by the corporations than in the 90s early 00s. We mostly won on the war on the code being readable and modifiable by anyone. We lost it on the system’s architecture and the data.

                  But the main thing is that we as users let ourselves get fu%^&* by the corporations by not treating technology as a useful tool but more and more as an integral part of our lives.

                2. 8

                  “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss”

                  Some context to digest while you mash that unkind or troll flag button: I’ve used Linux, off and on, for 20 years or so now. I’ve never really used Windows, especially not professionally. At this point it’s been a few years since I’ve used MacOS, even at home, but that’s OK since I doubt I’ll ever go back. But at this point, I’d have to say that Linux is my Windows. I don’t use it because I love it, I use it because it works well enough, is very compatible with all the stuff I need to work with, and I’m already familiar with it. I’m much more fond of the BSDs, and even more enamored of relatively obscure and impractical systems like Genode or Haiku or Redox or even Oberon; things that I don’t really have time to play with at this point in my life. So that’s where I’m coming from.

                  But even back when I was more zealous, framing the choice of OS as a “war” seemed wrong to me. There are so many different use cases, so many different needs, and the whole field is so young still. Why does it have to be winner-take-all? Why does it have to be a monoculture? Do all you opinionated expert technical people really desire that level of violence in pursuit of homogeneity, or is it just clumsy rhetoric wielded in ignorance of what war is really like?

                  Now, I’d be the first to point out that “Linux” is hardly just one thing. There are so many distros and desktops and init systems and so on; even Android is Linux if you squint at it right. But the fact remains, the Linux kernel (and more broadly, POSIX) is a paved cowpath that’s become a fenced-off megahighway. It makes some choices fast and efficient while making others nearly impossible, or at least highly dangerous. It’s not a stream you can cross, and it is very much driven by its corporate sponsorship. It’s a big improvement over Windows or MacOS in that anyone can read the code, at least in theory. But the number of people in the world who can actually do anything significant with that seething mass of exceedingly complex “open source” systems software is vanishingly small, and the number of people who actually contribute even smaller. If we’re just talking about the kernel, it’s a tiny cadre of highly disciplined corporate engineers who live and die by a code of backwards compatibility. Is it a big improvement that instead of just one company developing the OS and its APIs, it’s a loose hegemony of mutually distrustful competitors? I don’t know. Maybe, but it sure enforces technological lock-in, and that’s not necessarily a good thing.

                  In a networked world, compatibility should be driven by protocols and specs with independent implementations. What we have instead, too often, is arbitrary de-facto standards. Linux might be less of an offender than MS in this regard, but it’s still quite culpable. You won’t catch me cheering for the new boss.

                  1. 9

                    Linux doesn’t have >30 years of crushing opposing services and removing business threats.

                    Microsoft has been practicing Embrace, Extend, Extinguish for over 30 years. It has been practicing Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt for over 30 years.

                    In fact, they intended to do it in relation to Linux, as of the late 90s (As the Halloween Memos show

                    In discussing ways of competing with open source, Document I suggests that one reason that open source projects had been able to enter the server market is the market’s use of standardized protocols. The document then suggests that this can be stopped by “extending these protocols and developing new protocols” and “de-commoditiz[ing] protocols & applications”.

                    They also channeled large amounts of money to SCO in the hope that the copyright lawsuit would be won by them:

                    The document describes, among other points, Microsoft’s channeling of $86 million (equivalent to $116 million in 2019) to SCO.

                    For decades, they have deliberately hampered the market and new technologies to maintain an upper hand.

                    I do not think anyone with the full history can consider The Linux Foundation to be “slightly less bad” than Microsoft

                    1. 2

                      That’s not my argument, though. My argument is, monocultures are bad. War is bad. The relative badness of Party A and Party B is irrelevant.

                    2. 8

                      While I agree with a lot of what you’ve said, I’d like to point out that for me personally its not been a war o as in “Linux is better, Windows should diaf”. For me it’s been about not rewarding the bully and the absolutely horrible behavior.