Hacker News Reader

Comment by pjmlp | Hacker News Reader

To sell Windows laptops to the same crowd that buys Apple laptops to develop GNU/Linux software, instead of supporting Linux OEMs, and are unhappy that Apple only cares about developers on Apple ecosystem.

Microsoft understood that they only care about having some kind of POSIX support, and nowadays being Linux compatible is more relevant than straight POSIX, as the BSDs and IllumniOS also found out with their compatibility layers.

View on HN

Or, alternatively, a crowd whose needs aren’t completely met by Linux.

Then why they develop GNU/Linux software to start with?

People might get paid money to develop (proprietary!) software that deploys to Linux. That doesn't mean they enjoy using Linux.

Indeed, I have been doing that for years and am yet to install WSL.

Because their needs aren't met by developing Windows or macOS software?

Then again why they don't support GNU/Linux vendors?

So if someone installs Linux themselves they don't meet this bar you're setting? That seems pretty far from the normal open source ethos.

Ah, so using evil commercial OSes is part of that so called ethos?

No, installing your own OS is very open source.

Which isn't a thing with macOS and Windows, so where is that ethos again?

You were confused why people would do things with GNU/Linux without "supporting GNU/Linux vendors".

But that's restricting it to people that use the preinstalled OS, which is strange, because of how fitting it is to install your own copy of GNU/Linux.

"Yes, you see, you're only free if you do exactly what we tell you."

Also, it's a thing on Windows/PCs.

We are talking about GNU/Linux here.

We are not. You are.

That was the whole point of this thread, naturally some rather move goal posts to avoid the subject that Linux users rather give money to proprietary desktop platforms than help desktop Linux ever become a reality.

Yes. Because Linux is not competitive in some cases.

One reason might be, is that they might need to in part work with a server-side system that runs on Linux and it’s easier this way.

But maybe they also need to work with stuff thats Windows only. Say they need to produce media assets with the Adobe suite.

Not everything is vimmable.

SSH and X Windows servers also exist for Windows.

It takes me 2 minutes to install WSL Ubuntu. Or I could spend half a day on figuring out a hacky solution to a Windows/SSH/XWindows workflow that offers even a comparable level of integration. It will grow into weeks of obsessive tweaking until I feel compelled to write a blog post for HN where I show my sick setup and hours and hours I dumped into this, while meaningful work piled up in my TODOs.

... Or I could just install WSL.

Or just install Humming Bird, working just fine for me since 2000.

Or just install WSL?

What's the problem with Microsoft having an answer to this?

In what concerns Microsoft, I praise them for having acknowledged the strategy error that was not giving the UNIX subsystem the same love as Win32.

Because as proven by macOS and now WSL adoption, GNU/Linux would never have taken off if PCs already had a mature set of POSIX toys, given that its users care 0% about GNU/Linux, and would be deploying to HP-UX, Solaris, Aix, Irix, Tru64 just as well.

Cool. I'll use WSL though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com