Microsoft has developed its own Linux distro

[The Catboy]

I am glad to be the one posting this, as the Temp's most well-known Linux enthusiast.
So it appears Microsoft has thrown their hat into the Linux distribution ring and decided to make their own Linux distro. So that happened.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/0...repeat_microsoft_has_developed_its_own_linux/
Just please try to be civil and not turn this into an OS flamewar.

 

[The Real Jdbye]

I'm not surprised. It's no secret that Linux is the best server OS, and Microsoft surely knows this as well.

 

[Flame]

i dont blame them, Linux is more future proof.

most likely windows will run on Linux soon...

 

[DinohScene]

I can see Windows turning into a GUI for Linux.
The Windows Kernel will be replaced with Linux, Windows desktop GUI, filepaths altered slightly etc.

It's a good thing.

 

[Taleweaver]

I admit it: my mind is blown. Okay, won't be an OS meant for home use, but still...very nice.

 

[DjoeN]

So that's the reason why Windows 10 will be the last version ever released by MS

 

[jonthedit]

"Known linux enthusiast"?
Okay then help me out- [I am inexperienced with Linux and specifically GRUB] what version of GRUB do I need to boot Kali using Clover?

OnTopic:
I am surprised M$ bothered. They have a big enough market to not have to take this route.

 

[Bladexdsl]

so they are giving up on windows eh?

 

[Arras]

Why is everyone immediately assuming this means the end of Windows? It's just for servers, and it seems to be an experimental thing as much as anything else.

 

[Sakitoshi]

I wonder what's @Foxi4 opinion about this.

It's nothing too big though. Is only an OS for managed ethernet switches and linux dominates that area.

 

[Foxi4]

I wonder what's @Foxi4 opinion about this.

It's nothing too big though. Is only an OS for managed ethernet switches and linux dominates that area.

I think it's a good move. Linux is unavoidable in the server space in the same way that Windows is unavoidable in the consumer PC space.

 

[chrisrlink]

if only Linux was proprietary and not open source/GNU I'd love to see MS squirm at a tidalwave of Lawsuits well Apple could always sue cause OSX is Linux based

 

[TecXero]

That's interesting. I wonder if it will eventually get to the point where Windows is built on Linux. That would be great news for everyone, it would make it a bit easier to port between platforms.

 

[the_randomizer]

Most interesting, Microsoft would seem like the last company to do it, for a number of reasons, but this is invariably a really good move and I well...I've always wanted to learn Linux. The problem is I never know where to begin,

 

[The Catboy]

"Known linux enthusiast"?
Okay then help me out- [I am inexperienced with Linux and specifically GRUB] what version of GRUB do I need to boot Kali using Clover?

When it comes down to it, the bootloader you use doesn't really matter. I always either go with the default or if they give me the option to choose, I go with GRUB2.

Most interesting, Microsoft would seem like the last company to do it, for a number of reasons, but this is invariably a really good move and I well...I've always wanted to learn Linux. The problem is I never know where to begin,

Your best bet if you are coming from Windows would be either Linux Mint or Zorin OS. Or if you want something more "Mac-Like" elementary OS is a great start there.
90% of my Linux knowledge though came from me just going through distrowatch, then testing every since disto on there, spending weeks to months learning about as I used them.

 

[Taleweaver]

if only Linux was proprietary and not open source/GNU I'd love to see MS squirm at a tidalwave of Lawsuits well Apple could always sue cause OSX is Linux based

What are you talking about? If linux was proprietary, it would probably never have left Linus's own computer, let alone it have been grown to what it is today. It would also certainly not have been chosen by microsoft to build upon to begin with.

No idea why you're dragging apple into this, but OSX is actually based on unix, not linux (though admittedly, linux is based on unix as well). And no, you can't change the suer to google because android is linux-based...that fact doesn't make them the owners (besides...the whole shebang with legal claims and obfuscation is one of the reasons linux grew as well on servers: the thing was free to use and adapt without lawyers making threats).

 

[Dragonlord]

Waste of time. Why use a Linux distribution die-rolled together by an incompetent company if there are tons of long-term proven Linux distributions made by people who know how Un*x actually works (not stealing and claiming as their own as M$ did). I see no use in all this.

 

[McHaggis]

Waste of time. Why use a Linux distribution die-rolled together by an incompetent company if there are tons of long-term proven Linux distributions made by people who know how Un*x actually works (not stealing and claiming as their own as M$ did). I see no use in all this.

What an ignorant statement to make; you can't steal something that's free and open to everyone. Android, iOS, Mac OS X, Smart TVs, the router you connect to the internet with, NAS devices, all "stealing and claiming [Linux or Unix] as their own," right?

This story comes as no shock, though. Microsoft was reported as one of the top contributors to the Linux kernel in 2012. It's unlikely they'd contribute to the Linux kernel if they weren't actually using it for something (unless they wanted to provide interoperability for something they created to improve its popularity). Admittedly, I kind of wish they were doing something more with it — I'm a Linux and OS X user (the latter was more of an unfortunate compromise), but I'd trade them both in a heartbeat if Microsoft rebuilt Windows on top of Unix or Linux. Mostly because Linux user interfaces are subpar and OS X (well, pretty much any Apple product) reeks of Apple's arrogance.

 

[RodrigoDavy]

This doesn't mean much. Quite frankly, it's more likely that Android start to dominate the PC market than Microsoft building a linux-based Windows. They already have their own kernel and they worked very hard to make sure that most software from the 90s still run on nowadays Windows.

They are not going to do something as risky as replace their kernel and, thus, have to create new APIs and whatnot to get windows software to run on the linux kernel, with the additional risk of Windows software not running as good as in the NT kernel anyway.

Software is what is most important. That's why every people I know who uses Linux or OS X, have either dual-boot with Windows, a Windows virtual machine or at the very least Wine installed. Windows has a huge software catalog and although it's not the most stable or even best OS, it works. And sadly Microsoft will always have as a priority having backwards-compatibility with old Windows software, they're not going to make any drastic changes soon. They know that what matter is not Windows itself, but Windows software

 

[The Catboy]

(not stealing and claiming as their own as M$ did)

Do you even GNU?