Microsoft Build - DirectX and Linux (WSL) plus more

And now i’m thinking how much better it would have been if GNU Linux was released under GPLv3. In that case we could sue Microsoft (never name a company after your penis).

Ignoring the penis joke and taking your comment seriously (will I regret it?), how would GPLv3 allow us to sue Microsoft over this?
They are just shipping proprietary libraries and drivers with a linux distribution, which is not something that any GPL forbids, to my knowledge.
The only change from GPLv2 to GPLv3 that comes to mind here is the tivoization ban, but I don't see how that would apply here.

I'm not an IT Pro and don't know much about frameworks, but these news are making me wonder if the whole WSL thing is not a tool developped by Microsoft, for Microsoft, targeting the deployment/development of Azure stuff and, as a side effect, they made it public because... Why not?

If it's a tool developped for Microsoft. it also feels like MS could be laying the ground, block by block, for a DX12, Linux based Windows UI OS... But I'm still highly skeptical about this one. Could it be related to Project XCloud?

I'm just trying to figure out what could be MS' internal use case for WSL. It would explain why they keep pushing it, even if it's not a much requested feature.


Last edited by Mohandevir on 20 May 2020 at 12:29 pm UTC

If it's a tool developped for Microsoft. it also feels like MS could be laying the ground, block by block, for a DX12, Linux based Windows UI OS... But I'm still highly skeptical about this one. Could it be related to Project XCloud?

Probably not that, since xCloud runs on modified Xboxes, not normal servers. And WSL is used by quite a bunch of developers who don't want Linux VMs. It's too polished to be a Microsoft-internal tool, this is meant for the mass market and seeing real use out there.

The DX12 thing seems to be mostly about machine-learning and AI at this point.

The DX12 thing seems to be mostly about machine-learning and AI at this point.

Yeah... You are probably right, but not long ago, there was no UI or DX12 support at all, either... WSL is constantly evolving...

I'll post that here... There is a nice paragraph about DX12 outside of Windows that could look, imo, like a PR statement to "test the waters":

Microsoft Wayland Compositor

What is not specified is in what context did Microsoft hold that discussion...


Last edited by Mohandevir on 20 May 2020 at 1:09 pm UTC

Next variation: "I love goose, says the fox." ;-)

and he says it without lying, he just means something very specific by that that the goose would not like! :)

It would be much more credible the other way around... :)

Thanks for this article, Liam!

And here I thought that Microsoft Linux was a joke. Joke's on me, I guess.

With this you could write a Linux program that talks DirectX directly. Which is where it gets weird, because then you get a Linux program which only works when running on Windows. At this point, is it really a Linux program at all?

DX12 is the first layer. What they want is to implement OpenGL, OpenCL, etc. on top of it. IMO is a way to say to GPUs drivers developers: "just focus on the DX12 driver, we take care of everything else". So if they eventually focus on a Vulkan -> DX12 layer and Nvidia and AMD jump into the bandwagon, now you can guess what will happen with the performance of our native drivers...


Last edited by x_wing on 20 May 2020 at 1:55 pm UTC

Actually I don't care about Microsoft or Direct X, I think We are good to go with Vulkan and all Linux distros avaliable with all the possibilities. Vulkan is the future, We should support it.

How long before extinguish phase starts?

Never. Not because they don't want to, but because the importance of Linux as a whole is way bigger that than the worst-of-both-worlds WSL system can ever be. It simply doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Never say never when it's Microsoft. Changed in some ways, not at all in others ;)

You could argue that trying to pull developers from Linux to stick with Windows, and just use WSL for ML/AI/CUDA is part of an extinguish strategy. It is when you think of it quite literally, as keeping people on WSL where they control it. All depends on your point of view and what we're referencing when we say extinguish.

But the landscape is different. EEE applied to things microsoft could control in some way. The battle fought against Linux was lost long ago and the foothold that Linux has in the total market is way too big for EEE to work. Sure they can do the first E. They can try to do the second E, but it is doomed to fail because it won't find significant adoption. Which means the third one is out of the question.

To me the whole WSL thing is a curiosity. They made a Linux kernel work on Windows in a VM like manner, but what is the point? To have your Linux service go down with a windows update? Making things dependent on two systems instead of one is a guaranteed way to make it less reliable. As a whole WSL actually looks the same as Stadia. Sure, there is a narrow niche that might see an advantage in it and would use it, but it is not objectively better and will therefore be ignored by the big crowds.

its far worse than that.

intel have their own distribution wich is the only one who can take full advantage of their processors in some niche of the market.
IBM has their own distro and you can bet that there are some asic on their processor, or some transistors only acessible by their distro.
and so on, EVERYONE extends linux, that is why no one can extinguish it.

android is linux, but it has its own ecosystem completely independ from the desktop, stadia is linux but it has it own ecosystem that is only acessible via streaming, they are even making games like roblox/mario maker where you create content to be played on it...

my tv runs linux, so what? it has an free kernel with an proprietary UI that i can change, and the system is locked to an app store with a few apps that i can install on it and nothing more.
my router runs linux, and its pretty much the same, a few built-in functionalities and nothing more.
an air-drone runs linux, and they dont even have an official software to control it from an linux device...
where is the freedom on that?

do you see the patern here?
every one use linux either as an single apliance or to as the base to run e applications of their own ecosystem.
everyone creating their own extensions only avaliable on their ecosystem...

in other words:
google is extending linux with android.
microsoft will be extending linux with their own distro.
everyone will be using linux, and we will have some base in common such as libraries to build softwares on top of...
but most of the ecosystem that is what really matter may be exclusive to some apis, services, or system.

Exactly. Nice explanation about the EEE Liam. You couldn't have put it better

.... and there is lobbying from Microsoft not to make available some pro software on Linux (like Catia, Solidworks or Abacus).

Small correction here: Abaqus is still available on Linux! And they won't get those Linux users to switch to MS-Windows easily as there's tons of processes attached to it that rely on the underlying OS. Though many CAD programs abandoned Linux the FEA world looks a little bit differently. Especially programs that have also to run on an HPC cluster (though some companies were crazy enough to try to set an HPC cluster up on MS Windows, they quickly returned to Linux).

How long before extinguish phase starts?

Never. Not because they don't want to, but because the importance of Linux as a whole is way bigger that than the worst-of-both-worlds WSL system can ever be. It simply doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Never say never when it's Microsoft. Changed in some ways, not at all in others ;)

You could argue that trying to pull developers from Linux to stick with Windows, and just use WSL for ML/AI/CUDA is part of an extinguish strategy. It is when you think of it quite literally, as keeping people on WSL where they control it. All depends on your point of view and what we're referencing when we say extinguish.

Well, the Linux foundation is already owned by M$ and Google because of all the dollars that flow in so, the only person we can trust there is Linus. So, extinguish is not too far like we think. But hopefully, when M$ gives the word, Linus will just leave and keep maintaining the Kernel as an independent person. Not as an employee. And I'm Pretty sure all of those corporations that today fund the linux foundation will fund him because he is the most appropriate person to keep the Mainline Kernel going. Let's see

But hopefully, when M$ gives the word, Linus will just leave...

Why? I don't know much about the Linux Foundation's legal structure, but it should just be a matter of saying to MS to keep it's dirty money and be on their way, thus keeping the Linux foundation intact and independent. It's a shame if it's not thus.

Afterall, Linus is good to show the middle finger to big players. :D

Edit: And you think that all these platinum members won't try to keep in check Microsoft's "appetite for destruction"?

Linux Foundation Members


Last edited by Mohandevir on 20 May 2020 at 2:57 pm UTC

But hopefully, when M$ gives the word, Linus will just leave...

Why? I don't know much about the Linux Foundation's legal structure, but it should just be a matter of saying to MS to keep it's dirty money and be on their way, thus keeping the Linux foundation intact and independent. It's a shame if it's not thus.

Afterall, Linus is good to show the middle finger to big players. :D

Well i thought the same way like you but after realizing how much money they get from these corporations and the minimum amount of effort towards the community, I just got the conclusion they just care about money and that's all. Did you know that Linus himself gets paid less than the CEO of Linux foundation. The fucking creator of it all gets paid less than an irrelevant guy on a suit. Do you know how expensive the tickets for the LinuxCon organized by them is? I mean, IMHO it should be free for all since they are paid millions of dollars by all donators they have. And do you know where all this money goes to? Yeah, neither do I. Lots of FLOSS projects dying because they don't have enough funding to keep on and Linux foundation itself claims it exists for the best interest of the community and what they do about it? Nothing. I consider RedHat the legit Linux foundation. They are the ones that help Linux the most, contribute a lot to the Kernel and listen to the community. They've donated to lots of FLOSS projects and even some of their employees maintain packages of some distros like Fedora. And no one donated to them because they are a private company that succeeded by supporting the community and making their business in the open AFAIK. That was a little rant but that's what I see today in our community. I really don't trust the Linux foundation

I consider RedHat the legit Linux foundation.

You mean IBM?

I really don't trust the Linux foundation

Ah! Ok... This what it's all about. The only thing that I can say is that we have to trust that it's going to continue to be the way it's been for the past few years. Many conflicting/opposing interests are supporting the Linux Foundation and should act as a counter power to Microsoft's inlfuence. It's not like MS is the sole investor.


Last edited by Mohandevir on 20 May 2020 at 3:39 pm UTC

I really don't trust the Linux foundation

Ah! Ok... This what it's all about. The only thing that I can say is that we have to trust that it's going to continue to be the way it's been for the past few years. Many conflicting/opposing interests are supporting the Linux Foundation and should act as a counter power to Microsoft's inlfuence. It's not like MS is the sole investor.

I didn't say it was. I even mentioned Google. Well if you want to trust them, then it's on you. Everyone is free to act however they like. I keep trusting Linus only and his work as the Kernel maintainer

I consider RedHat the legit Linux foundation.

You mean IBM?

Well, not really. RedHat was acquired by them but they still have the freedom to manage their own business. They respond to IBM but AFAIK they're not controlled by them specifically regarding their moves towards the FLOSS community which is mostly composed by Linux users/devs

I really don't trust the Linux foundation

Ah! Ok... This what it's all about. The only thing that I can say is that we have to trust that it's going to continue to be the way it's been for the past few years. Many conflicting/opposing interests are supporting the Linux Foundation and should act as a counter power to Microsoft's inlfuence. It's not like MS is the sole investor.

I didn't say it was. I even mentioned Google. Well if you want to trust them, then it's on you. Everyone is free to act however they like. I keep trusting Linus only and his work as the Kernel maintainer

Saying that I trust them is exagerated, but saying that I trust in the Foundation's structure is more accurate. I may be naive though. As for code review and this is the most important part, from what I understand, they have awesome folks working on that, not only Linus.


Last edited by Mohandevir on 20 May 2020 at 3:57 pm UTC

Although I don't like the writing style and generally try to follow through and make sure I'm as informed as possible, the info from techrights.org is pretty hard to ignore. Microsoft doesn't need technical superiority for EEE to work - there are other ways to achieve the same goal, and what they're up to is very, very worrying to anyone who values software freedoms.

Techrights might sometimes have a point, but I get turned off when I read one of the articles, follow the links, and realize the guy is quoting himself quoting himself quoting himself. I don't trust the accuracy, is what I'm saying--I want to because I'm on what I'd consider the same side as the guy, but I don't. At best, Techrights for me is something that might flag an issue for further investigation to see if it's real this time.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 20 May 2020 at 4:44 pm UTC