Sorry loldier. Since I recognized your name, and have read some other posts
you've made, it didn't make sense you would say something like that. I think
I'm a little riled up over the whole ubuntu-on-windows discussion:
Does anybody know if the full ubuntu repositories are set up by default?
Obviously, if this is really authentic ubuntu a person can point it to any
repositories they want. However, I'm curious what the default set up is.
If it is just like ordinary ubuntu out-of-the-box, with the same DE,
At best this move is to encourage more developers to develop on Windows.
Whether the image is bit-for-bit is irrelevant. What matters is that MS is
hosting it. How do you know MS won't use this as an opportunity to spy?
Also, if this is about making MS more successful that is a bad thing
I don't think like this. I would like to believe them but I don't.
Let's look at who gets what according to the people in this thread who like
this idea:
Benefits
MS: Tools are available to its developers in a somewhat more convenient
fashion than before.
FS: More people migrate to GNU/Linux from windows.
Are we in agreement that MS does not want more
"I'd like to think that MS has quit their evil ways and this time they are
sincere."
Please don't think this. Nothing has changed What's going on is only their
Embrace-Extend-Extinguish strategy. We seem to currently be in the embrace
phase. It's important to recognize it for what it is
You have made your point clearer to me, so thank you for that.
In the case of GIMP and EMACS they are not using linux, They are using a
windows port of a free software program--which is good. Here they are not
using a Windows port of a free program, they are using a Windows port of an
I'd like to think that MS has quit their evil ways and this time they are
sincere. Hope so, and I don't see anything immediate evil emrging out of
this. It looks like an admission that GNU tools and UNIX-like CLI is here to
stay and conquer.
MS should take one more step and make Windows
And this is the full video of 'Running Bash on Ubuntu on Windows'.
https://sec.ch9.ms/ch9/6c0f/773a2d20-9eb0-4dd8-869f-425785136c0f/P488_mid.mp4
"Let's suppose lots of people start using Windows because they don't view
proprietary software as unethical, and this compatibility layer gives them
all the convenience of running Ubuntu without the inconvenience of switching
between operating systems. Microsoft gains users, and Linux loses
>I truly believe more free software on Windows makes more migration to
GNU/Linux (as long as the said software exists on GNU/Linux too).
I agree on this point. Before I switched to GNU/Linux (but had heard of it
and was very interested in it), I tried to use as much libre software as
> One thing that must be noted is the possibility that Microsoft won't
actually tell the end-user that he's using free software.
I suspect this also. They call it running the "Ubuntu Linux userspace"
because if they referenced GNU project, some people might investigate
further. They will
MS doesn't care what operating system you run so long as you are using and
paying for their tools/services.
They Embrace Libre OS's/iOS/Android because they want to get people locked
into their ecosystem. Anything to make money as you said.
So far there is no public plan to support X11 applications. Not only is that
a bigger technical problem, I don't think they want to show too much love to
the competition as it will eventually make their software look bad.
So far it has a command line interface only. GUI apps are hardly supported.
They might implement it later, who knows, but it has not been released yet,
so we'll have to be patient and wait and find out.
Any platform? How about malware? What about universal maleware?
http://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-microsoft.en.html
Just what I want, giving MS control over free software as it is being
written. Even if all of this were not a threat to free software, it is a
threat to privacy.
You misread my thoughts. The quotes are emphasized, that is in cursive
script. The links are the source of the quotations.
In between the quotes, I try to analyze what they are after. When I say
"freedoms are 'marketing', I'm sarcastic. I had the intention to say that
it's not too much to
Isn't it fantastic how Microsoft can reap the benefits of GNU/Linux to fairly
easily implement this compatibility, while the Wine project has had to
reverse-engineer several components for a compatibility layer? /sarcasm
I personally support running free software on any platform whether free or
non-free as long as there's no lock-in.
It is ubuntu running on top of windows
"It is possible that there is an evil hidden plan behind all that. But I do
not see it. It may simply be that MS makes a strategical mistake that
benefits the free software movement."
So I guess we can agree to disagree for now. I'm not ready to assume a mega
corporation, richer and more
> First, I didn't say MS made a mistake
Of course you didn't. Quite the contrary, you suggested that MS can't make a
mistake. But you also suggested that I must think Microsoft made a mistake,
which I don't.
> Nor did I say that I thought MS believed it would gain or lose users. I was
My theory is that it's all about apps. Last time I went to BB at least 80%
of the laptops had touch screens. This has been and continues to be the wave
of the future. The one with the better apps wins. The majority of mobile
app developers focus on developing for iOS or Android. If MS
Here they call it the "inverse of Wine".
They hope bringing the tools to Windows the developers will come and write
code for apps that run on Windows.
Why would they do something like that? Because they want developers to choose
Windows as the platform on which they develop their apps.
Ballmer yells "dee-vee-loh-peurs".
It's all about keeping ground, staying relevant and -- making money.
Then:
"Going to war with open source made Microsoft a ton of money."
Now:
"Embraciong open source is going to make us a lot of money."
The biggest issue RMS might bring up is that the WSL (Windows Subsystem for
Linux) is not free. Another longstanding issue is, of course, the lack of
credit for the GNU Project.
https://youtu.be/Vhh_GeBPOhs
If you search for videos you will find some with MS people explaining it.
They insist it is not a virtual machine. They also repeatedly say that
'ubuntu is on top of windows'.
It doesn't matter. As long as it is attached to windows, windows has ultimate
control--overtly or covertly.
"All for-profit corporations are evil."
Correct, but they have not all been sued for anti-trust!
"They're nothing more than conspiracy theories."
Did you read the Wikipedia article on EEE?
"I'm seeing a lot of unreasonable paranoia here."
You can call it unreasonable all you like, I still feel
So is like a virtual machine?
Those are some excellent points onpon4. Thank you for making them.
I'll try to address some of them. First, I didn't say MS made a mistake; I'm
the crazy conspiracy theory guy--remember!? I was making an argument against
those who said MS could have made a mistake. I'm also the guy dumb
I had never heard of EEE, so thank you for mentioning it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish
> Did you read the Wikipedia article on EEE?
I did that when I was still in middle school, mate. And then I did it again
several times, because I was obsessed with hating Microsoft at the time and
took every opportunity that I could to make "Microsoft sucks" presentations
for school
> If so, then MS not only feels that this extra convenience is useful for
them; It also means they think it is so useful they are willing to sacrifice
some users for it.
Why do you presume that Microsoft accepts the premise that this will cause
people to migrate to GNU/Linux? I get the
I have to agree with Magic Banana, and I'm seeing a lot of unreasonable
paranoia here.
The "embrace and extend" or "EEE" strategy involves embracing a standard in a
proprietary program, and then adding proprietary extensions that competing
programs either can't implement or have a
I'm going to wait to hear what rms has to say about this.
I have a lot of respect for you and Magic and many others who have been here
a lot longer than I have. As of now, however, the only authority I accept
unconditionally in matters of free software is rms.
About the laptops with touchscreens, there are touchscreens compatible with
the linux-libre kernel?
"The latest version of GNewsense" ... is hopelessly outdated. It no longer
gets security fixes so should not be used. Debian 'main' is as libre as
Trisquel. One of the only practical advantages of Debian over Trisquel is in
the 'unstable' rolling release, anyway.
ROFLMAO
The goodix touchscreen requires a binary blob that is about 120 bytes big,
and it was deblobbed in the latest version of linux-libre. There is leaked
documentation of the blob format, that might be used to write a free config
tool that outputs such a blob. This is not an ISA blob, so this is
So, what´s this? a combination of UNIX and DOS?
Why can't people just have dual boots. That way when they are using GNU/Linux
they see it stands on its own and they can use it instead of Windows.
When I was in graduate school many years ago, I bought a cheap second
computer and hooked it up using a kvm. Then I had GNU/Linux and I had
I don't know, but you are better off making a separate thread--if there is
not one already.
It is a little hard to tell what you are saying and what you are quoting.
This appears to be a quote from you:
"Freedoms are "marketing" and FSF is failing. I never guessed it was supposed
to be a fight to ask people give credit to the GNU project where it's due.
Instead, they take the
Classic EEE.
But GNU/Linux being so fragmented gives us a huge advantage to avoid that.
It's a good start if they begin to use a GNU/Windows environment instead of
Powershell, anyway.
The next logical step is asking developers to replace that NT kernel with a
Linux-libre one. You know
Sounds very similar to Cygwin:
http://cygwin.com/
What's the point? Why would anyone use such a thing?
The latest version of GNewsense is built straight on Debian. The only
downside is losing any extra bug fixes, security checks etc performed during
the Ubuntu packaging. These will presumably migrate upstream into the Debian
repos eventually, but it takes time for them to filter from
I had never heard of EEE, so thank you for mentioning it. Wow! it just keeps
amazing me more and more how people can patronize MS given how scummy they
are! My guess is that they aren't aware of many of these things. Our number
one goal should be raising awareness. That is probably why
"Classic EEE."
Yes. The embrase phase continues. Perhaps we should now start calling it
GNU/Windows?
Ars has an article on this.
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/03/ubuntus-bash-and-linux-command-line-coming-to-windows-10/
Our understanding is that these are not recompiled or ported versions of the
programs (as are used in tools aiming to provide a Unix-like environment on
quote from the link:
http://blog.dustinkirkland.com/2016/03/ubuntu-on-windows.html
---
Here's let's break it down slowly...
Windows 10 users
Can open the Windows Start menu
And type "bash" [enter]
Which opens a cmd.exe console
Running Ubuntu's /bin/bash
With full
This situation really puzzles me.
So far, I accept all the points exposed here.
Now that I think about it, I've been thinking about something, but I would
like to see some opinions/comments on my thoughts: If people will start using
"GNU/Windows" then there's something that must be done in
On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 20:14:54 +0200 (CEST)
tegskywal...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Similar but better
Anything designed to make life easier for Windows developers should be opposed.
pgpbBE_VJ5hW_.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Similar but better
53 matches
Mail list logo
