> If the NT Kernel is "Doing Linux better than Linux", that's a fascinating statement, because the NT Kernel is also running Win32, UWP, and all of its own chores at the same time. What's the Linux kernel doing? ;P
Microsoft, the former juggernaut, would say "Linux, who?", and then proceed to throw their sales and marketing weight around.
> a testament to the underlying NT kernel, because the NT kernel doesn't care, it's still chugging along doing its thing and doing it well.
It must be advantageous for Microsoft, at least in the short-term, to open themselves up and decrease friction between themselves and the Linux community, especially on the server-side where Linux won, than to innovate and compete on Microsoft-centric features and functions - to create something new that's more compelling.
Also, Microsoft risks seeding their own destruction when they create compelling new technologies like XMLHttpRequest that, once appropriated by their competition, reduces the compelling nature of any other technologies Microsoft created for platform lock-in. I can understand innovation fatigue setting in for management when they have enough institutional XMLHttpRequest stories to go along with the endless failed software project investments and evaporating markets.
I assign meaning to the decisions and directions that individuals and companies take. Microsoft paved a gilded path for application development that points AWAY from the Windows platform. Yes, there is novelty and a definite technical achievement there that one can appreciate. But I choose to focus on the motives rather than the technical achievement, and I am disturbed by what I perceive is Microsoft's capitulation in the consumer software/platform arena.
If Microsoft is soon to be the SAAS and Cloud company and not the Windows/Office company, then the software world is worse-off because competition is good.
> Microsoft paved a gilded path for application development that points AWAY from the Windows platform. Yes, there is novelty and a definite technical achievement there that one can appreciate. But I choose to focus on the motives rather than the technical achievement, and I am disturbed by what I perceive is Microsoft's capitulation in the consumer software/platform arena.
Most paths support two-directional travel. The ancient adage that "all roads lead to Rome" seems to apply. Rome built a lot of roads to travel away from Rome, but nearly everyone realized that all of those roads also lead back to Rome. That does seem to be something of an intent in Microsoft's strategy here: if Windows is great at reaching users where they are, then Windows is great at bringing users back.
WSL makes it extremely easy to build on/with/for Linux, without leaving Windows. It worked for Macintosh to bring BSD users to Macintosh. It seems to working for Microsoft that WSL has given an option for previously Mac-or-Die web developers to give Windows a second chance. There have been plenty of headlines here on HN of previously Mac-only users delighted by new Surface devices. Obviously anecdotal evidence, but signs do seem to point that new roads are leading to Rome.
I've been using WSL since it was first released on the Insider Fast Ring. It's been great. Sure, its had it its problems, but the team is really responsive to issues filed on github. Ive had all of my WSL issues fixed and usually in a new build in 2-3 weeks after filing.
WSL has also been a savior in that I no longer need a Linux VM at home. Which is "great" because virtualization support (at least for me) has been broken for months. I can't even boot my desktop with Intel virtualization enabled in the BIOS.
Microsoft, the former juggernaut, would say "Linux, who?", and then proceed to throw their sales and marketing weight around.
> a testament to the underlying NT kernel, because the NT kernel doesn't care, it's still chugging along doing its thing and doing it well.
It must be advantageous for Microsoft, at least in the short-term, to open themselves up and decrease friction between themselves and the Linux community, especially on the server-side where Linux won, than to innovate and compete on Microsoft-centric features and functions - to create something new that's more compelling.
Also, Microsoft risks seeding their own destruction when they create compelling new technologies like XMLHttpRequest that, once appropriated by their competition, reduces the compelling nature of any other technologies Microsoft created for platform lock-in. I can understand innovation fatigue setting in for management when they have enough institutional XMLHttpRequest stories to go along with the endless failed software project investments and evaporating markets.
I assign meaning to the decisions and directions that individuals and companies take. Microsoft paved a gilded path for application development that points AWAY from the Windows platform. Yes, there is novelty and a definite technical achievement there that one can appreciate. But I choose to focus on the motives rather than the technical achievement, and I am disturbed by what I perceive is Microsoft's capitulation in the consumer software/platform arena.
If Microsoft is soon to be the SAAS and Cloud company and not the Windows/Office company, then the software world is worse-off because competition is good.