Most active commenters
  • kbenson(4)

←back to thread

Ubuntu on Windows

(blog.dustinkirkland.com)
2049 points bpierre | 12 comments | 30 Mar 16 16:35 UTC | HN request time: 4.546s | source | bottom
Show context
bcantrill ◴[30 Mar 16 19:35 UTC] No.11392265[source]▶
This is great to see, as it's very similar to the approach that we took with LX-branded zones on SmartOS[1][2]. I commented at some length on the other thread on this on HN[3], but I have a bunch of questions about apps that we know to be thorny: Go, strace, tcpdump, systemd, etc. As we learned, this approach is entirely possible -- but there are many, many details to be nailed before you get to the point that you can run production applications on it. So while the journey across the uncanny valley of Linux is long and arduous, we know from our experience that it can be done. Very much hoping that Microsoft gets to the other side -- and that they open source it all so we can all learn from one another!

[1] http://www.slideshare.net/bcantrill/illumos-lx

[2] http://us-east.manta.joyent.com/patrick.mooney/public/talks/...

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11392119

replies(5): >>11392299 #>>11392418 #>>11393777 #>>11395242 #>>11395345 #
crudbug ◴[30 Mar 16 19:39 UTC] No.11392299[source]▶
I think M$ is targeting more developers with *NIX background on the desktop side rather than Linux apps on server. So a bash support with uniform CLI is the end-game.
replies(2): >>11392350 #>>11393097 #
talawahdotnet ◴[30 Mar 16 19:45 UTC] No.11392350[source]▶
Yea, I think they are going after developers who use OS X because it is UNIXy. Smart move given how en vogue Apple laptops have become for developers these days.
replies(9): >>11392457 #>>11392525 #>>11392717 #>>11392840 #>>11392967 #>>11393415 #>>11394345 #>>11394921 #>>11395006 #
riotdash ◴[30 Mar 16 20:43 UTC] No.11392840[source]▶
Let's be honest here. Does this change make some developers actually even consider to change their OS X/Linux Desktops to Windows? Yeah it is really cool thing that we can finally use windows cmd like the terminal on unix systems however:

- What about lack of all the Linux/OS X GUI software?

- What about lack of all the UNIX OS features?

- What about all those billions and billions of Windows malware, viruses, adware etc.

- What about all the spying and restrictions that Microsoft has integrated into the Windows? (e.g. cannot block Microsoft spy server in the hosts-file, forced updates etc.)

- What about the fact that OS X and Linux have always been at least decent from developers point of view but Windows has always had problems and then things like Vista and Win8 happen.

- What about the advertisements served to you in the login screen?

- What about all the future shit MS will throw at you?

- Other stuff can't remember now

If and IF this will actually work out well, I would say this finally makes Windows usable for software development however I don't see any reason why anyone would change from UNIX based system to Windows unless they plan to make even bigger changes in the future...( like rewriting whole Windows to be UNIX based for example. :) )

replies(14): >>11392937 #>>11392946 #>>11392993 #>>11392999 #>>11393035 #>>11393151 #>>11393163 #>>11393299 #>>11393392 #>>11393419 #>>11394460 #>>11394665 #>>11394800 #>>11395209 #
pookeh ◴[30 Mar 16 21:05 UTC] No.11392999[source]▶
While I prefer to develop today on OS X...your post is nothing but FUD.

> What about lack of all the Linux/OS X GUI software?

Windows prolly has more GUI applications than both those OSes combined. That's not necessarily a good thing but it's not bad either. It just means there is a Win substitute for everything.

> What about lack of all the UNIX OS features?

Same answer as above.

> What about all those billions and billions of Windows malware, viruses, adware etc.

I download a lot of crap on my home Win computer and haven't had a virus once in the past 6 or 7 years. There are likely more Android viruses active now than Windows.

> What about all the spying and restrictions that Microsoft has integrated into the Windows?

If you don't give permission the action is not taken. Granted I am currently getting spammed to update my home computer from win 7 to 10 but it hasn't force installed on me. Likewise for automatic updates.

> What about the fact that OS X and Linux have always been at least decent from developers point of view but Windows has always had problems and then things like Vista and Win8 happen.

Which is what this new initiative is trying to fix.

Don't get me wrong. I love my osx for dev and my *nix boxes for servers. But if I can get one machine/OS for desktop development of nix and windows without having to run silly emulators or switch between VMs then I'm sold.

replies(4): >>11393136 #>>11393312 #>>11393380 #>>11394437 #
1. schwap ◴[30 Mar 16 21:40 UTC] No.11393248[source]▶
> You being extremely lucky doesn't change statistics.

There's nothing lucky about being prudent.

2. leo_mck ◴[30 Mar 16 22:11 UTC] No.11393431[source]▶
I absolutely love the fact that windows download and install critical updates automatically for me. I would feel like a slave if I had to do it manually.
replies(1): >>11394143 #
3. michaelmrose ◴[31 Mar 16 00:30 UTC] No.11394143[source]▶
You kind of are a slave aren't you?

After all you can only auto update microsoft and store apps. Other apps will either handle updates themselves probably with an annoying UAC prompt and possibly at inconvenient times when you actually want to use the apps. Some have processes that constantly sit in the background sucking up your resources to pop up annoying prompts to update application foo during which you must watch for them changing your browser preferences and installing adware. Others you will simply have to go to their website and download an exe or msi.

Meanwhile you are missing the fact that people don't want to avoid automatic updates to fix security holes. They want to avoid updating to the next undesirable update foisted on the users before its ready and much to peoples annoyance. Example the windows 8 UI change.

Unbelievably staying on an older still supported platform until you are ready to update is a feature you have to pay money for!

Lest you misunderstand I'm not talking about clinging to windows xp till they claw it from your cold dead hands 3 years after end of life I'm talking about the future equivalent of staying with windows 7 and upgrading to windows 10 because 8 sucks.

replies(2): >>11394827 #>>11395351 #
4. gnaritas ◴[31 Mar 16 02:40 UTC] No.11394638[source]▶
> Now days all the developer/engineer GUI apps are made OS X first, Linux second and maybe Windows.

That's not even close to true, you're living in a bubble. Windows and windows apps still dominate the world, by a long shot.

5. kbenson ◴[31 Mar 16 03:40 UTC] No.11394827{3}[source]▶
> Unbelievably staying on an older still supported platform until you are ready to update is a feature you have to pay money for!

You are making it sound like they are forcing, or even automatically upgrading Windows 7 to Windows 8, or Windows 8 to Windows 10. They aren't. You have to specifically choose the 8->10 update, even if you are getting updates automatically installed.

> I'm talking about the future equivalent of staying with windows 7 and upgrading to windows 10 because 8 sucks.

Which you can do. I'm not sure what exactly your complaint is here. What am I missing?

(Note: I found Windows 8 to be superior to Windows 7 in every way except the start menu. I find Windows 10 superior to Windows 8 in every way except for Privacy :/ )

replies(1): >>11396223 #
6. leo_mck ◴[31 Mar 16 06:24 UTC] No.11395351{3}[source]▶
> "Meanwhile you are missing the fact that people don't want to avoid automatic updates to fix security holes."

You are right. My english is not very good and I did not read what OP wrote carefully about this. Maybe it was the silliness of the word "slave" being used like this that threw me off ;)

Those third apps updates can be annoying but I honestly cannot complain about all those problems you talk about, like processes sucking up resources, popups, and adware automatic installation on updates. I do not even see this happening with (very) non tech people around me. So I think it is a very suspicious argument. Even worst would be to suggest that those are problems are Microsofts blame. Maybe you get those adwares exactly because you think UAC is annoying. Can we blame Google when a user get a virus ridden app from a place other than the official store and ignore the OS warnings?

But if this is the reality, it is another good argument for the push for windows 10 update and the adoption of UWP. In fact, I think microsoft should push even harder for windows 10 updates, it is the right move.

Also, I think that the idea of maintaining a Windows machine updated with only the parts the user wants is hilarious. And I do not know who are those people you talk about. I love to test OS previews and I have never heard a person who already do not liked Microsoft for whatever reason make a big deal about a UI update (windows 8 "metro" mode was shit but easily ignored, windows 10 UI is better and amazing).

The more updates and innovation, the better. I am not afraid :)

7. Guest91283 ◴[31 Mar 16 10:59 UTC] No.11396223{4}[source]▶
"You are making it sound like they are forcing, or even automatically upgrading Windows 7 to Windows 8, or Windows 8 to Windows 10. They aren't."

That's not true. They're automatically upgrading computers. Read some of the thousands of below comments to hear the stories. My Windows 8.1 laptop automatically scheduled itself to upgrade, and I was fortunate enough to be paying close attention to cancel it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/4a0asv/warning_...

https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/4a5edx/psa_window...

replies(1): >>11397530 #
8. kbenson ◴[31 Mar 16 14:43 UTC] No.11397530{5}[source]▶
That was a mistake. I find it beyond belief that they would intentionally upgrade people without confirmation or notification. As much as they would like people to upgrade, they know this would be PR suicide. At a minimum they would have had notifications that it was going to happen, and made it opt out. To my mind, that it was automatically checked but in the optional updates section points towards it being a weird bug in which an unforeseen interaction of attributes caused the problem. For example, it's possible that selecting that you did want to upgrade to Windows 10 through the popups they showed was supposed to put it in that weird state, where it was optional but checked by default, which would be a non-normal situation for an update. Weird exceptions like that are very prone to bugs.
replies(1): >>11400936 #
9. justinclift ◴[31 Mar 16 22:04 UTC] No.11400936{6}[source]▶
Really wishing you were correct. :/

MS have been pushing Win10 onto Win7/8(.1) end users for what seems like a few months now, continually escalating how forceful they're being.

eg recent IT media about it:

  http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/17/microsoft_windows_10_upgrade_gwx_vs_humanity/
As you mention, it seems like straight out PR suicide.

Personally, it would be useful to know what their end game is justifying all of this bad karma. It'd have to be fantastic. Either that, or someone inside MS is seriously out of control. :(

replies(1): >>11401016 #
10. kbenson ◴[31 Mar 16 22:16 UTC] No.11401016{7}[source]▶
While that's a wild situation, and MS is not behaving well, it's not quite forcing a Windows 10 upgrade. It's forcing people to be nagged about it, and causing problems in corporate IT departments where they do not want to upgrade and it keeps subverting their control.

It's not good, but it's not forcing upgrades either (which is liable to get them sued).

replies(1): >>11401035 #
11. justinclift ◴[31 Mar 16 22:19 UTC] No.11401035{8}[source]▶
Hmmm, I really get the impression it's doing a lot more than just nagging. Direct examples mentioned here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11285488

replies(1): >>11401173 #
12. kbenson ◴[31 Mar 16 22:42 UTC] No.11401173{9}[source]▶
Whoa, I missed that. I was thinking of the prior case where it "accidentally" became recommended, but this casts that prior episode in new light. I can't imagine what they are thinking.

Unless... There's some fundamental core security problem in earlier Windows versions that isn't in Windows 10 and they don't want to tip off anyone to what it is, because it's so large and egregious it opens them up to a lot of liability and lawsuits. Okay, I'll take my tinfoil hat off now...