Support us on Patreon
PayPalDuring a recent online event the current Microsoft President, Brad Smith, opened up a little bit about open source and their previous failures with it.
Sadly, their history with open source is a rather tumultuous one. Previous Microsoft CEO, Steve Ballmer, famously said years ago how "Linux is a cancer" and no one really forgot. It's interesting now though because of how Microsoft has changed over the years, as they finally warmed up to open source.
In a chat hosted by MIT CSAIL, President Brad Smith mentioned:
Microsoft was on the wrong side of history when open source exploded at the beginning of the century and I can say that about me personally. The good news is that, if life is long enough, you can learn … that you need to change.
They now own GitHub, a website built around code sharing and their own Visual Studio Code editor is also open source under the MIT license. Expanding there, GitHub also recently acquired npm (the company behind Node package manager) too. That's merely scratching the surface, as they're even integrating Linux more and more into Windows itself with their Windows Subsystem for Linux. Heck, they're even going to put their own web browser Edge onto Linux which is now being built with the open source Chromium.
What are your thoughts?
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
I trust Microsoft as much as I trust Google, Oracle or Apple, which is to say very, very little. Unless there is a huge show of support, like opensourcing Windows 7 or Visual Studio, then I'm inclined to think this is just marketing talk.
2 Likes, Who?
Quoting: epsaavedraI trust Microsoft as much as I trust Google, Oracle or Apple, which is to say very, very little. Unless there is a huge show of support, like opensourcing Windows 7 or Visual Studio, then I'm inclined to think this is just marketing talk.
I ll be honest if they open sourced windows 7 i would go back to running windows exclusively as it was windows 10 that got me on linux full time.
1 Likes, Who?
Para-Gliding 
May 17, 2020
Therefore, let's them compile Office 2019 or 2020 for linux! Fuck my job that requires it and that vmware with windows on it just for that invasive, closed and incompatible (with libreoffice) software.
That day I will recognize this statement.
That day I will recognize this statement.
0 Likes
Quoting: Whitewolfe80Quoting: epsaavedraI trust Microsoft as much as I trust Google, Oracle or Apple, which is to say very, very little. Unless there is a huge show of support, like opensourcing Windows 7 or Visual Studio, then I'm inclined to think this is just marketing talk.
I ll be honest if they open sourced windows 7 i would go back to running windows exclusively as it was windows 10 that got me on linux full time.
Now that's a good idea, open source older versions of Windows. As a Windows and Linux user that would satisfy me as well as I would have a 100% binary compatible open source OS
0 Likes
Quoting: TerminusaquoNow this is the perspective I don't get, at all. Why would opening the source of any Windows version make it more attractive to use? NTFS wouldn't suddenly get better. It can never get better because it's dying a death of a thousand cuts. Everything that is horrible about using Windows (drive letters, registry, abysmal userland design, etc) would still be present including the horrible UI/UX design, which can easily be replicated in other desktop environments. There are some positives that could come from Microsoft opening its software stack, but Windows isn't one of them in my opinion; because Linux/GNU (and variations) is already a better OS platform.Quoting: Whitewolfe80Quoting: epsaavedraI trust Microsoft as much as I trust Google, Oracle or Apple, which is to say very, very little. Unless there is a huge show of support, like opensourcing Windows 7 or Visual Studio, then I'm inclined to think this is just marketing talk.
I ll be honest if they open sourced windows 7 i would go back to running windows exclusively as it was windows 10 that got me on linux full time.
Now that's a good idea, open source older versions of Windows. As a Windows and Linux user that would satisfy me as well as I would have a 100% binary compatible open source OS
This is why I don't evangelize to Windows users much. I want people to use Linux/GNU (and specifically Fedora) because it's a good OS and the user likes how it works. I don't want Linux land flooded with 'permissive open source' Windows users that want to do Windows in Linux. I want to help people learn to do Linux things better, not Windows things better on Linux. That's my personal Linux learning goal as well. That doesn't mean we don't adopt smart ideas from outside, but that we blaze our own way not follow Microsoft, Google, or Apple.
3 Likes, Who?
This is why I don't evangelize to Windows users much. I want people to use Linux/GNU (and specifically Fedora) because it's a good OS and the user likes how it works. I don't want Linux land flooded with 'permissive open source' Windows users that want to do Windows in Linux. I want to help people learn to do Linux things better, not Windows things better on Linux. That's my personal Linux learning goal as well. That doesn't mean we don't adopt smart ideas from outside, but that we blaze our own way not follow Microsoft, Google, or Apple.[/quote]
If windows was open I could correct code that i didn't want and maintain the full compatibility with direct x 11, I would strip out about 3 to 4 gb of the code as I believe using the lite template I could get the install size down to about 1gb while maintaining functionality for games. But sure I would love to help improve Linux but i cant because all of my knowledge base in terms of coding is based on the windows kernel now there are some cross overs but not many.
If windows was open I could correct code that i didn't want and maintain the full compatibility with direct x 11, I would strip out about 3 to 4 gb of the code as I believe using the lite template I could get the install size down to about 1gb while maintaining functionality for games. But sure I would love to help improve Linux but i cant because all of my knowledge base in terms of coding is based on the windows kernel now there are some cross overs but not many.
0 Likes
slaapliedje May 17, 2020
Quoting: 14I've basically been forced to use WSL1 for the past few months, and it's horrible. Even doing things like a simple 'apt update' take forever compared to a real Linux system (VM or otherwise). WSL2, they gave up on it being a kernel supported subsystem, and is instead just a virtual machine using Hyper-V extensions. Which by the requirements I'm currently restricted to is not okay either (and it's basically a VM that won't give you any X applications...)Quoting: F.UltraI don't think so. It's to make it easier to manage Linux services that run on Azure. Now, admins and developers don't have to run a VM. I don't think MS was "losing" anybody to Linux that is now satisfied with WSL.Quoting: LinasAnd I am sure that is why Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) exists. Not because they actually want their users to use Linux, but because they know that they lost to Linux in the server market, and cannot pull off a compelling Windows-proper alternative.
I'm quite sure that WSL only exists in order to keep Linux Server developers and Administrators using the Windows desktop, and not loosing them to a Linux desktop like they lost on the server side.
So WSL is probably really only meant as a way to get a more native version of bash /ssh, etc. doing anything beyond just that is rather painful.
0 Likes
https://www.gamingonlinux.com/2020/05/microsoft-president-admits-they-were-wrong-on-open-source
I am one of the people who are not buying to Microsoft story.
To say, they have developed a Linux subsystem, what does that mean?
Who uses Linux subsystem and for what?
In the web world, solutions are built on top of open-source. They talk of a LAMP software stack.
That stands for Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP (and I can add WordPress).
I am one of the people who are not buying to Microsoft story.
To say, they have developed a Linux subsystem, what does that mean?
Who uses Linux subsystem and for what?
In the web world, solutions are built on top of open-source. They talk of a LAMP software stack.
That stands for Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP (and I can add WordPress).
0 Likes
Quoting: 14Quoting: F.UltraI don't think so. It's to make it easier to manage Linux services that run on Azure. Now, admins and developers don't have to run a VM. I don't think MS was "losing" anybody to Linux that is now satisfied with WSL.Quoting: LinasAnd I am sure that is why Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) exists. Not because they actually want their users to use Linux, but because they know that they lost to Linux in the server market, and cannot pull off a compelling Windows-proper alternative.
I'm quite sure that WSL only exists in order to keep Linux Server developers and Administrators using the Windows desktop, and not loosing them to a Linux desktop like they lost on the server side.
In all the places where I have worked where we used Linux servers all of us Linux devs where running Linux desktops. With WSL I'm quite certain that a huge proportion of them have been forced to work on Windows Desktops by IT/Management.
PuTTY already existed for the people administrating Linux servers from Windows, if that is all that Microsoft where reaching for then why spend the vast amount of time and resources that they have with WSL?
0 Likes
This means very little to desktop Linux. Correct me if I am wrong but isn't open source software different than FOSS? One is free (Linux), while other is open source with a restrictive license.
So them admiting they were wrong about open source is a matter of them going back on the decision to share their code. It's not going back on anything else. Many of their apps are either not supported or lacking on Linux. And they stand in the way for desktop Linux to progress. Do you all really believe DX12 Ultimate is a coincedence? In a time when Vulkan is being utilizied (Switch, Android, Proton, Stadia). Gaming is important aspect to get marketshare, and Vulkan being widely used on PC will power up gamng on Linux significantly. With more marketshare more games and apps will come to Linux.
They don't love Linux. The notion that they do is bordering on propaganda. They simply love the parts of Linux that helps their business.
So them admiting they were wrong about open source is a matter of them going back on the decision to share their code. It's not going back on anything else. Many of their apps are either not supported or lacking on Linux. And they stand in the way for desktop Linux to progress. Do you all really believe DX12 Ultimate is a coincedence? In a time when Vulkan is being utilizied (Switch, Android, Proton, Stadia). Gaming is important aspect to get marketshare, and Vulkan being widely used on PC will power up gamng on Linux significantly. With more marketshare more games and apps will come to Linux.
They don't love Linux. The notion that they do is bordering on propaganda. They simply love the parts of Linux that helps their business.
1 Likes, Who?
See more from me