Support us on Patreon
PayPalDuring the Microsoft Build 2020 developer conference, Microsoft has raised a number of eyebrows at their Linux plans. We've had a lot, and I do mean a ridiculous amount of people emailing in and messaging across various places about Microsoft. So, to get it out of the way and provide you a place to comment, here we are.
Microsoft put up a developer blog post titled "DirectX ❤ Linux", which is a nice bit of PR bait. In reality, it means nothing for the standard desktop Linux. It's focused entirely on the Windows Subsystem for Linux which Microsoft tightly controls and DirectX itself remains firmly closed source. Not only that, this current implementation relies on pre-compiled user mode binaries that ship as part of Windows itself. Right now it seems to also be focused on CUDA and AI / Machine Learning, however, they also announced Linux GUI applications will eventually be supported on WSL as well.
A Microsoft developer even said on the Linux Kernel mailing list, that there's "no intent" to have people coding for DX12 on Linux. Although another developer also said they "consider the possibility of bringing DX to Linux with no Windows cord attached". That's just words for now though. I wouldn't read much into it.
That's not all, they also announced the Windows Package Manager under an MIT license, which works much like the ones on Linux do in terminal. Better late than never.
Going even further, Microsoft also announced .NET MAUI, an "evolution" of the Xamarin.Forms toolkit which Microsoft said "supports all modern workloads" which once again did not mention Linux anywhere. However, to be properly clear, at least .NET MAUI should work on Linux like Xamarin.Forms but be entirely community supported (as noted on GitHub). Oh and Maui is already used—oops? It's GVFS all over again.
First they embraced Linux doing away with the Ballmer era of "Linux is a cancer", now they're extending a branch saying they were "on the wrong side of history" with open source and now they continue the extending. How long before extinguish phase starts (EEE)? Don't be fooled about Microsoft's stance and their aim here, it's not because they love Linux. They're going where the developers are to continue pulling people to Microsoft services. Nothing more.
If any of it concerns you: I hope you put that energy and effort into continuing your support of the Linux desktop. Help it to grow and prosper. Support your favourite distribution, your favourite application and/or game developer by throwing some money at them.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Last edited by Shmerl on 20 May 2020 at 7:10 pm UTC
slaapliedje May 20, 2020
Quoting: ShmerlThe unfortunate truth is, most of the IT people (the ones that have to manage laptops, the active directory, user management, etc) are NOT going to be the people with Linux experience. Anyone with good Linux experience that'd be able to set up the management will be more likely in the position of Linux system administrator (or that new generic thing SRE). Because I mean why waste talents?Quoting: GuestJust a pity they couldn't go the route of allowing a corporate standard with GNU/Linux desktop in the first place, because that would have solved all the problems.
Normal companies allow it. Those whith thick skulled IT might not, since they don't want to spend money on anything extra. And Linux support costs money too. The funny thing is, that even supporting WSL would cost them resources and time. WSL is pretty pointless in comparison with proper desktop Linux IT support like Google, Mozilla, RedHat and others do it.
Also, since WSL2 moved to Hyper-V, I don't get a point of it anymore. It's not reverse Wine-like idea anymore, it's a VM. So just run Linux in VirtualBox or something if you are in such situation. At least you'll be using an open source virtualization.
And of course 'managed by' generally means you need some sort of 'spy' software to make sure employees are installing wireshark on things (or have a reason to do so) or using approved vpn clients, and definitely have to have an anti-virus... You know, all the things that makes a Windows workstation slower.
But even with those on top, I'd still be more productive using Linux natively :P
Quoting: slaapliedjeAnd of course 'managed by' generally means you need some sort of 'spy' software to make sure employees are installing wireshark on things (or have a reason to do so) or using approved vpn clients, and definitely have to have an anti-virus... You know, all the things that makes a Windows workstation slower.
But even with those on top, I'd still be more productive using Linux natively :P
Those who spend money on it do it just fine (Google is probably the biggest example). They just shouldn't be cheapskates. But many bean counters think that forcing developers to use Windows saves them money, while in reality it costs them productivity.
Last edited by Shmerl on 20 May 2020 at 7:18 pm UTC
Quoting: GuestAs nice as it would be to have GNU/Linux on every employees desktop at a very big, global, corporate entity....there's many sectors and job roles to consider. Financial services, human resources, building maintenance, catering, etc. Microsoft has dominance on desktop, and familiarity of use is important. That's a reality to be faced.
I mean it should be an option, not that it should be the only option. Good companies make that option for you.
Last edited by Shmerl on 20 May 2020 at 7:22 pm UTC
Quoting: slaapliedjeI skipped some pages...
but in my mind the reason they're working so hard on getting WSL2 working, and even with GUI applications is so they can try to prevent the flow of users away from Windows 10. I'm not talking about those that freak about the telemetry and privacy issues, they've already switched to Linux.
I'm talking about the IT groups that are getting requests to have a certified Linux system for corporate use. If 'But I have special tools that I need to use that are not available to Windows, I need to be able to use Linux to do my job!' can be answered with 'Use WSL!' then Microsoft wins the lockout war.
Also, I'll leave this here for creepiness.
Linux localhost 4.4.0-18362-Microsoft #836-Microsoft Mon May 05 16:04:00 PST 2020 x86_64 GNU/Linux
This is exactly how it is used at my company. The virtualization engine is locked off in BIOS because apparently someone in the past used a VM to "hack into the computer" (I have no idea what precisely was involved in this). Therefore we have no option to just use a Linux VM, let alone a whole partition. And I am a data scientist, so I do a lot of AI/ML development, as well as general dev work; so my IT's default position to me is "Well, you can use WSL...". But if WSL2 is going to use Hyper-V, I cannot see how it can run without virtualization enabled (at which point I'll just set up a VM anyways :) ). Though I do have other personal machines running Linux and only remote into the Windows laptop as needed for some file access and stuff that has to be done on desktop Office.
Quoting: EhvisTo 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.
In my own professional experience, WSL has already seen huge adoptation in enterprise for working on things like Docker and Kubernetes, where native Windows support is sorely lacking or inadequate. So why not use Linux? Because in enterprise, device management software has become a huge thing, as companies are moving away from desktop computers to laptops, and need a way to control what employees have access to, and what software they use, both to minimize risk of data leaks, but also to make sure they are compliant with license agreements and such. There does exist such software for Linux, but the by far most popular, as far as I know, is Microsoft Intune, which of course only exists for Windows and macOS, so allowing employees to use Linux is often not a good option. Of course there's a breaking point, where using Windows is just too cumbersome to be worth it, even with those added benefits, but by adding just enough grease to make Windows adequate for those software developers they appeal to with WSL, they make the deal just barely worth it.
tl;dr It's not for servers or home users, but to maintain Microsoft lock-in on enterprise hardware.
Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 20 May 2020 at 11:13 pm UTC
Luke_Nukem May 20, 2020
Quoting: Purple Library GuySo, does anyone else mentally pronounce "WSL" as "Wizzle"? Or maybe "weasel"?
Nah. I say "Wissel"..
Quoting: Purple Library GuyThat's Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. It's part of how they (briefly) won the browser wars. It is not how they got rid of Lotus 1-2-3, for instance.Fair enough, but my point was really that the precise EEE strategy is just a specific manifestation of a general mindset at Microsoft.
See more from me