449
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] WillySpreadum@lemmy.world 143 points 8 months ago
[-] HappyFrog 82 points 8 months ago

I'm really confused what this meme is trying to say.

[-] morrowind@lemmy.ml 21 points 8 months ago

"Micro$oft bad"

[-] HKayn@dormi.zone 10 points 8 months ago

Who cares as long as it says "Microsoft bad"

[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca 52 points 8 months ago

I can't be the only one, so WSL = Windows subsystem for Linux.

[-] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 62 points 8 months ago

which, confusingly enough, is a linux subsystem under windows. The name sounds like the opposite.

[-] xlash123@sh.itjust.works 11 points 8 months ago

Really just an English problem. Read it as it is a subsystem by Windows for Linux.

But yeah, LSW would've been more clear. Plus, it's almost LSD.

[-] mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 8 months ago
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] GreenSkree@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

I think it makes more sense to read that it's a "Windows Subsystem for (running) Linux (applications/programs)".

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 6 points 8 months ago

It should be Windows's Subsystem for Linux.

A better acronym might be Windows' Linux Subsystem.

[-] oktoberpaard@feddit.nl 3 points 8 months ago

WSL 1 is a compatibility layer that lets Linux programs run on the Windows kernel by translating Linux system calls to Windows system calls, so in that sense I understand the name: it’s a Windows subsystem for Linux [compatibility]. It doesn’t use the Linux kernel at all. With WSL 2 they’re using a real Linux kernel in a virtual machine, so there the name doesn’t make much sense anymore.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 25 points 8 months ago

I'm a little concerned Microsoft will make a linux distro and introduce proprietary components into it that will drive users of other distros to it because "why use any other distro when the M$ distro can run my games/microsoft office/whatever?". Because that's how they'll kill linux: a bunch of proprietary kernel modules with which only Windows software can run.

We should have multiple linux mega-corps before that happens, otherwise we're fucked.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] skooma_king@lemm.ee 14 points 8 months ago

They’d probably just buy canonical in this scenario.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 8 points 8 months ago

Canonical would have to accept. Given their move towards proprietary code, that wouldn't surprise me in the least, honestly.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] ricdeh@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

How would that affect any of us? Linus Torvalds would still be the lead kernel maintainer, all the other FOSS distros would still exist, and all the people that currently use Linux (out of conviction, out of idealism, out of the FOSS/GNU philosophy) would stick with them, meaning de facto no change whatsoever.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 7 points 8 months ago

Not everybody uses linux out of conviction, idealism, or principle. Many use it either by chance or convenience. The purists are probably not the majority of linux users.

There are people who already won't switch to linux because windows has WSL. Gaming has held back many people from switching too, although that's becoming less of a problem. However, if there were no reason to switch to other distros, and an M$ distro were to become the most used distro...

Do you know what M$ did when they had the largest market share for browsers? Do you know what Google is currently doing with their marketshare on the browser market?

Windows has a pitiful representation on the server side, but if that changed to an M$ distro with proprietary linux modules in order to make certain software work (or something more insidious that I can't think of), it would change the server landscape too. And suddenly, you can't write stuff for the most popular servers without installing M$ kernel modules or software.

The linux zealots are not the majority. Zealots never are.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago

A few things come to mind here.

  1. MS tried to ship a renegade JDK with proprietary features, back in the 90's. That didn't go very well for them, as they drew the ire of Sun Microsystems which was a decently sized player at the time. It was a clear licensing issue, and they lost the case. Point being: they're historically not great at this kind of thing.
  2. The GPL is designed to thwart this scenario, specifically for things like paid software (e.g. Windows). MS would have to move to a "free Windows software, paid service" model before any of this could happen. But the service must be optional, and they'd have to provide the source to anyone that wants it. That said, they're on track to make Windows free (as in beer), so who knows?
  3. Nvidia gets to ship binary Linux drivers, so closed-source binary packages for MS proprietary components on top of Linux might be possible. But again, I don't think they get to charge for that.
  4. WRT to drivers/packages, RedHat famously charges for access to their package repository, making automated patching and upgrading a nightmare if you go without. This is one hell of a GPL loophole and worthy of far more corporate exploitation. I can easily see MS following this path.
  5. "The net treats censorship as a defect and routes around it." - John Gilmore - (Many) People will just fork away or happily sit somewhere else in the GNU family tree, far from anything MS builds. If the need arises, compatibility layers like WINE will show up eventually.
[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 4 points 8 months ago

The chances of seeing an M$ Winix or something in the next decade are pretty slim, IMO, but to me it's the worst case scenario / beginning of the end. I'm crossing my fingers that windows 12 is shitty, but not too shitty.

I can only hope you're right.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 7 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

thats EEE and we are all afraid of that

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] nick@midwest.social 17 points 8 months ago

I like that this exists. Wsl is good.

[-] alihan_banan@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

Ew, virtual machine with a power loss

[-] bort@sopuli.xyz 12 points 8 months ago
[-] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

EEE only works if you can corner the market for the technology. I almost guarantee you nobody is dropping Linux in favor of WSL.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Skelectus@suppo.fi 7 points 8 months ago

Not really. MS and others have grown dependent on it, and going forward with eee would be shooting their own web service foot.

[-] dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago

I mean, I like WSL for what it is. Having suffered through the limitations of MinGW32 and Cygwin, I appreciate that the WSL simply "just works." But I'm also not kidding myself, as one could get the same experience from VirtualBox and a little more elbow-grease. I also like how the WSL automatically exposes a host-only SMB mount, making the Linux filesystem a lot more accessible from the very start.

What I don't appreciate is that the WSL places the Linux firewall outside the Windows firewall. Locking that thing down can be daunting for a novice, if it's ever done at all. Considering that the main use-case for this is development, that means there can be a lot of WSL setups out there with exposed and vulnerable web services on 'em.

[-] Simon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 8 months ago

Pretty sure this should be in reverse? And can you really say you're into Linux if you don't even know what the fuck WSL is?

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 19 points 8 months ago

It makes sense from MS's perspective. They started not liking Linux, and now have integrated it in their OS with WSL, thusly becoming a full clown for the great hypocrisy compared to their original dislike of Linux.

[-] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 8 months ago

I think there's probably some linux users that have never heard of WSL

[-] sxan@midwest.social 4 points 8 months ago

raises hand

I live in Linux; what I do not know is Windows. Don't have any, and haven't had to touch it in over a decade. Should I know WSL if I expect to never have to use Windows for the rest of my life?

[-] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 8 months ago

nope. it's just a fancy word for a linux VM running on windows with special integrations like full file system access etc.

it's mainly used by developers who need to use windows for work but want a linux filesystem and command line for development. integrates well eith VSCode.

[-] sxan@midwest.social 2 points 8 months ago

Ah. So equally irrelevant for Mac folks?

15 years ago, it was hard to be a developer and avoid some contact with Windows (unless you were senior enough to have some pull), especially in the East Coast, where all high tech lags by about 5 years. Now days, the assumption that everyone must have to have some Windows interaction is more of an ass-U-me.

There's exactly one Windows machine in my life right now, and it's my wife's work computer. I only have to touch it when it's fucking something basic up, like audio, and I couldn't install something like WSL on it in any case.

[-] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I think WSL was Microsofts way of trying to get developers to keep using Windows.

[-] cupcakezealot 6 points 8 months ago

microsoft has never really been anti linux though... some executives might have been but not the company as a whole.

and wsl is one of the best things they've done. windows 10+ is an even better development machine (basically what os x was in the snow leopard days)

[-] cydrDeals@sopuli.xyz 11 points 8 months ago

dude ... 'happy' there's wsl and visual studio code right now, but you should've been here 20 years ago

[-] notTheCat@lemmy.ml 5 points 8 months ago

better development machine

By developing on a GNU/Linux VM instead? fuck MS for not finding a suitable solution for developing on their OS for years and shoving an entire another OS inside instead

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024
449 points (100.0% liked)

linuxmemes

21596 readers
222 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
  •  

    Please report posts and comments that break these rules!


    Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't fork-bomb your computer.

    founded 2 years ago
    MODERATORS