5 ms·

What would be the point of using microsoft's linux?

by diskcat 10y ago

Spooky23 10y ago
Licensing on HyperV. Red Hat subscriptions require that you license by socket, effectively doubling the cost for licensing on a per server basis. If you were using Microsoft Linux, you could potentially ditch VMWare and RHEL costs.
revelation 10y ago
The same as using a lot of the other Microsoft stuff: you can pay and have someone fix $problem on a deterministic timescale. You can upgrade without having to fear your production system will come crashing down.
- greglindahl 10y ago
  Huh, I've done both of those with Linux for more than a decade. Can you name some features more unique to Microsoft?
- marcosdumay 10y ago
  > you can pay and have someone fix $problem on a deterministic timescale Really? When did MS start fixing bugs for their paying customers in a deterministic timescale? The point about upgrades may be good, but MS has started breaking things on update recently too.
  - Spooky23 10y ago
    For years. You open up a crit sit that is tagged as a product defect and they will turn fixes around quickly. If you are strategic to them, they'll fly in people.
pkaye 10y ago
Running it on Azure?
toyg 10y ago
They could use it as stepping stone for businesses heavily invested on Linux or already having a mix of Linux and Windows: "we guarantee this is the best Linux distribution for compatibility with MS tech (Msad, powershell, Azure, mono etc etc)".
- vostok 10y ago
  I don't know how appealing that is. Even from a GUI perspective, moving from Linux to Windows is such a huge step backwards. I have to keep an eye on a whole bunch of things at work so I only run a Windows box for one or two pieces of software. This box takes up less than 25% of my screen real estate. Every window on the Linux box is automatically placed and I usually have to put in literally no effort. On the Windows box every window is such a pain to manage. Some applications make an effort to remember where their windows were placed, but this is usually broken in some way and still does not allow me quickly switch layouts like on Linux.
  - toyg 10y ago
    I think most businesses won't ever consider Linux from a desktop perspective, we are talking servers and backoffice.
  - Sanddancer 10y ago
    You can have a tiling window manager under windows as well, like HashTWM https://github.com/ZaneA/HashTWM https://github.com/ZaneA/HashTWM or AquaSnap http://www.nurgo-software.com/products/aquasnap http://www.nurgo-software.com/products/aquasnap . Window management under windows can be just about the same as it is under linux.
matt_wulfeck 10y ago
Taking back market share from Mac users. Especially among developers.
- bithush 10y ago
  This. I would be very interested in running Microsoft Linux instead of Ubuntu on a physical dev box. With .NET Core, ASP.NET, etc. having an MS proper Linux would be great. Something along the lines of "We officially support development with ASP.NET, .NET Core, Mono, etc. on Microsoft Linux for deployment to Azure Microsoft Linux instances".
  - osweiller 10y ago
    Your last paragraph betrays that you completely misunderstand the Linux platform, cloud platforms, or how Microsoft can succeed. What you described would literally be the death knell for all of Microsoft's recent initiatives, and goes in exactly the opposite direction of their movements.
    - bithush 10y ago
      How so? Microsoft want to support everything they can on Azure. That is just sensible business IMHO. However there are businesses out there who like to work in a single vendor system as much as they can. I have no doubt that Microsoft will come out with their own Linux distro in the next 2-3 years. They don't need too, but they also didn't need to do lots of the things they have done recently.
      - osweiller 10y ago
        Your argument is that Microsoft would introduce their own distro (a "proper" Microsoft Linux), and then declare their Linux-related ventures only "supported" on that Linux. I feel like I've accidentally stumbled upon some internal discussion group of Microsoft's where very low level employees who completely misunderstand the market give their Microsoft-centric view of the world.
bithush 10y ago
The same as using Red Hat's Linux. You get a well supported environment. If you are a Linux shop but want to run on Azure then it makes sense, to me anyway, to go with the best supported OS on that platform. I love Linux and while I also have some nagging negative thoughts about Microsoft getting so cosy with the Linux world, I also can't pretend I wouldn't be super excited to run a Microsoft Linux on my dev machine and then push to a Microsoft Linux on my Azure instances.
- osweiller 10y ago
  I don't think there is a widespread "nagging negative thoughts" about Microsoft working with Linux. That isn't where the skepticism comes from. Azure, like all other cloud providers, fully supports and functions with all mainstream Linux distros (indeed, the Linux kernel includes a large number of kernel contributions from Microsoft, particularly around hypervisor support). When you conjecture about some synergy between your dev machine and Azure cloud machines, it makes me wonder if you are just extrapolating based on some assumptions of the platform, or if you have a real working knowledge of it. All of this conjecture just seems bizarre. It's good that Microsoft is getting more knowledgeable about other platforms, but there is nothing at all exciting about some conceptual Microsoft Linux.
  - bithush 10y ago
    I come from the Microsoft of the 90s where they followed their Embrace, Extend, Extinguish methodology. My "nagging negative thoughts" all stem from those memories. As for dev machine/cloud machine conjecture, I just mean I would like to have a consistent experience between what I develop on and what I deploy too. It isn't a huge deal, just nice to have more than anything.
    - osweiller 10y ago
      Not a huge deal, but you'd be "super excited" about it? I develop on Windows, mostly. I deploy to Ubuntu, Redhat, Amazon's AMI, among others. I literally will repeat that you sound like you know nothing about Linux, cloud providers, or Microsoft's play in this market.
hollander 10y ago
> What would be the point of using microsoft's linux? Azure. It will be like Amazon Linux, which is based on Fedora if I'm correct. I wonder what Microsoft will use, and if they choose Debian, if the Debian project will profit from it. Furthermore, they will want better support for Ubuntu on Windows. If people don't need an Ubuntu machine to run Linux, without having to mess with Virtualbox, that will keep more people on Windows, well I guess that's what they hope. They seem to move into a new world, where they are no longer the one superpower. SQL Server can run on Linux, just another example.
- merb 10y ago
  Amazon Linux is based of CentOS 5.

What would be the point of using microsoft's linux?

by diskcat 10y ago

What would be the point of using microsoft's linux?

Licensing on HyperV. Red Hat subscriptions require that you license by socket, effectively doubling the cost for licensing on a per server basis. If you were using Microsoft Linux, you could potentially ditch VMWare and RHEL costs.

revelation 10y ago

The same as using a lot of the other Microsoft stuff: you can pay and have someone fix $problem on a deterministic timescale. You can upgrade without having to fear your production system will come crashing down.

greglindahl 10y ago
Huh, I've done both of those with Linux for more than a decade. Can you name some features more unique to Microsoft?
marcosdumay 10y ago
> you can pay and have someone fix $problem on a deterministic timescale Really? When did MS start fixing bugs for their paying customers in a deterministic timescale? The point about upgrades may be good, but MS has started breaking things on update recently too.
- Spooky23 10y ago
  For years. You open up a crit sit that is tagged as a product defect and they will turn fixes around quickly. If you are strategic to them, they'll fly in people.

pkaye 10y ago

Running it on Azure?

toyg 10y ago

They could use it as stepping stone for businesses heavily invested on Linux or already having a mix of Linux and Windows: "we guarantee this is the best Linux distribution for compatibility with MS tech (Msad, powershell, Azure, mono etc etc)".

vostok 10y ago
I don't know how appealing that is. Even from a GUI perspective, moving from Linux to Windows is such a huge step backwards. I have to keep an eye on a whole bunch of things at work so I only run a Windows box for one or two pieces of software. This box takes up less than 25% of my screen real estate. Every window on the Linux box is automatically placed and I usually have to put in literally no effort. On the Windows box every window is such a pain to manage. Some applications make an effort to remember where their windows were placed, but this is usually broken in some way and still does not allow me quickly switch layouts like on Linux.
- toyg 10y ago
  I think most businesses won't ever consider Linux from a desktop perspective, we are talking servers and backoffice.
- Sanddancer 10y ago
  You can have a tiling window manager under windows as well, like HashTWM https://github.com/ZaneA/HashTWM https://github.com/ZaneA/HashTWM or AquaSnap http://www.nurgo-software.com/products/aquasnap http://www.nurgo-software.com/products/aquasnap . Window management under windows can be just about the same as it is under linux.

matt_wulfeck 10y ago

Taking back market share from Mac users. Especially among developers.

bithush 10y ago
This. I would be very interested in running Microsoft Linux instead of Ubuntu on a physical dev box. With .NET Core, ASP.NET, etc. having an MS proper Linux would be great. Something along the lines of "We officially support development with ASP.NET, .NET Core, Mono, etc. on Microsoft Linux for deployment to Azure Microsoft Linux instances".
- osweiller 10y ago
  Your last paragraph betrays that you completely misunderstand the Linux platform, cloud platforms, or how Microsoft can succeed. What you described would literally be the death knell for all of Microsoft's recent initiatives, and goes in exactly the opposite direction of their movements.
  - bithush 10y ago
    How so? Microsoft want to support everything they can on Azure. That is just sensible business IMHO. However there are businesses out there who like to work in a single vendor system as much as they can. I have no doubt that Microsoft will come out with their own Linux distro in the next 2-3 years. They don't need too, but they also didn't need to do lots of the things they have done recently.
    - osweiller 10y ago
      Your argument is that Microsoft would introduce their own distro (a "proper" Microsoft Linux), and then declare their Linux-related ventures only "supported" on that Linux. I feel like I've accidentally stumbled upon some internal discussion group of Microsoft's where very low level employees who completely misunderstand the market give their Microsoft-centric view of the world.

bithush 10y ago

The same as using Red Hat's Linux. You get a well supported environment. If you are a Linux shop but want to run on Azure then it makes sense, to me anyway, to go with the best supported OS on that platform. I love Linux and while I also have some nagging negative thoughts about Microsoft getting so cosy with the Linux world, I also can't pretend I wouldn't be super excited to run a Microsoft Linux on my dev machine and then push to a Microsoft Linux on my Azure instances.

osweiller 10y ago
I don't think there is a widespread "nagging negative thoughts" about Microsoft working with Linux. That isn't where the skepticism comes from. Azure, like all other cloud providers, fully supports and functions with all mainstream Linux distros (indeed, the Linux kernel includes a large number of kernel contributions from Microsoft, particularly around hypervisor support). When you conjecture about some synergy between your dev machine and Azure cloud machines, it makes me wonder if you are just extrapolating based on some assumptions of the platform, or if you have a real working knowledge of it. All of this conjecture just seems bizarre. It's good that Microsoft is getting more knowledgeable about other platforms, but there is nothing at all exciting about some conceptual Microsoft Linux.
- bithush 10y ago
  I come from the Microsoft of the 90s where they followed their Embrace, Extend, Extinguish methodology. My "nagging negative thoughts" all stem from those memories. As for dev machine/cloud machine conjecture, I just mean I would like to have a consistent experience between what I develop on and what I deploy too. It isn't a huge deal, just nice to have more than anything.
  - osweiller 10y ago
    Not a huge deal, but you'd be "super excited" about it? I develop on Windows, mostly. I deploy to Ubuntu, Redhat, Amazon's AMI, among others. I literally will repeat that you sound like you know nothing about Linux, cloud providers, or Microsoft's play in this market.

hollander 10y ago

> What would be the point of using microsoft's linux? Azure. It will be like Amazon Linux, which is based on Fedora if I'm correct. I wonder what Microsoft will use, and if they choose Debian, if the Debian project will profit from it. Furthermore, they will want better support for Ubuntu on Windows. If people don't need an Ubuntu machine to run Linux, without having to mess with Virtualbox, that will keep more people on Windows, well I guess that's what they hope. They seem to move into a new world, where they are no longer the one superpower. SQL Server can run on Linux, just another example.

merb 10y ago
Amazon Linux is based of CentOS 5.