Item — HN Reader

Well done for signally failing to get a single point I made. Well up to HN commenter standards -- perhaps you'll make it on to https://twitter.com/hn_commenter

I am typing on Linux right now. I work for a Linux vendor. I like Linux and use it every day. I do not run Windows at all, anywhere, unless someone is paying me to.

As for Android, there is this thing called AOSP. Check it out. You might also wish to contribute to Replicant, since you are so passionate: https://replicant.us/

If you look hard enough on Google, you can probably find my (rather positive) reviews of Linspire from back when it was new. (It wasn't as good as Corel LinuxOS.) You'll also find me praising Ubuntu's efforts and bemoaning their cancellation.

Linux is anything but small; it is huge. It is what allows me to keep the lights on and put food and drink on my family's table.

MS executing its hallmark embrace-and-extend on it is _disastrous_ news and is one of the biggest dangers Linux has ever faced.

Don't shoot the messenger.

1 comments

How do you explain your contradictory beliefs that "Linux is huge and doing great" and that Microsoft is desperately trying to make its tools look credible with marketing and hype, and at the same time Microsoft is bordering on world domination with _disastrous_ news that might extinguish Linux forever? Or where Linux is the dominant computing platform everyone serious uses, and at the same time in danger of being squished by Microsoft?

> "As for Android, there is this thing called AOSP. Check it out."

It's what you get if you remove all the things people want, like Chrome and YouTube and drivers and Google store, and are left with just a kernel which nobody cares about. It's what manufacturers take, and put something nice but proprietary on top before it becomes desirable. (btw, if Android counts as a huge successful use of Linux, how is Microsoft adding a Linux VM option to Windows going to extinguish Android?)

> "MS executing its hallmark embrace-and-extend on it is _disastrous_ news"

It isn't news, WSL has been around for years, and before that the Unix subsystem for more years. And why are you afraid that Microsoft doing literally anything with Linux might lead to you running Windows? How is that going to happen?

> "Linux is anything but small; it is huge."

Then how is Microsoft adding a Linux VM option to Windows a "disaster"? Is it huge and doing great, or tenuous and barely holding on?

> "It is what allows me to keep the lights on and put food and drink on my family's table."

You just said you would use Windows if someone paid you. Linux being extinguished wouldn't stop you from earning. Not to mention the doublethink involved in how Linux can both "be extinguished" and still exist in Windows, or how Linux being used in Android, extended in proprietary ways, is great, but being used in Windows is not great.

Because it's just anti-Microsoft fearmongering, not anything which makes rational or reasonable sense.

EEE was about standard protocols; if Microsoft extend SMTP or HTML and everyone becomes dependent on their version, they could leverage that to kill Netscape. If Microsoft put a Linux VM in Windows, that doesn't change what happens on your server, on your phone, on your laptop. If people start developing for "Microsoft Linux" because it's /better/ because Microsoft builds things people want, that's called "competition".

Do you genuinely believe that you are refuting my arguments here? My points are not complicated or difficult, and your responses are facile.

Linux is strong on servers and phones.

This is, in part, because you can deploy tens of thousands of servers (and tear them down again) at very little cost, and Google gives Android away.

No software licensing.

Being cheap to do means not much money goes into Linux development as a result. Google is doing it to weaken Apple.

Always follow the money.

Windows still dominates desktops. This makes MS money. Not from Windows, but what goes on top: Office and Exchange and Server licences. Evidence: MS gave Win10 away for free in order to get it established.

If Linux development slows and stabilises, then it will be easier to run Linux binaries on other OSes that merely emulate Linux. (Examples: WSL, FreeBSD Linuxulator, Joyent SmartOS.)

If MS manages to make WSL a better Linux than Linux, then it strengthens the market for Windows running Linux workloads, which weakens Linux.

There are multiple markets here. You have to consider all of them and their interactions.

No, E&E is _not_ about standards and protocols. It is about money.

Netscape was free for non-commercial use. In business, you had to pay. Also, Netscape sold one of the leading web servers. That is how Netscape made money.

MS made IE free, but free is no good if the product isn't as good. So it built IE into Windows, and IIS into Windows Server, and gave them away for free, including upgrades. To make them desirable, it added some snazzy interactive stuff in the form of ActiveX (client-side) and ASP (server-side).

Result: Netscape couldn't sell its pro products any more and went broke.

Ubuntu is big on servers because Ubuntu is a good desktop, and when it came out, the other decent desktops -- e.g. SUSE -- cost money. Ubuntu took their market share but didn't make any money. Within a decade, most young techies knew Ubuntu first so they chose it for server stuff too, and servers make Ubuntu money.

Ditto Red Hat and SUSE (now). Give the desktop away for free, make money on servers.

Follow the money.

If Windows can do that better, nobody will bother with Linux. The money goes to MS instead, then RH & SUSE & Ubuntu will die, and I will be out of a job.

It is not about standards. It is about money.