Windows Subsystem for Linux

[iansjack]

(BTW - how have you changed the behaviour of Linux by having access to the source code? I've only done this once in more than twenty years of using Linux.)

Interesting question. Me, personally, haven't. But many others have changed the behaviour, adapted it to their needs, and even contributed their changes back.

In my experience there's also less need for one to change the behaviour of Linux

In other words, the argument about being able to change the operating system is a red herring. I agree.

what it doesn't do right can normally be changed through a configuration file

We've already established that you are crap at configuring Windows. Let's not go there again.

[Antti]

What I am going to write about this topic are just opinions based on observations so please do not treat them like a fact that I could prove with statistics or studies. It seems that free software advocates put quite a lot of emphasis on the benefits that are not actually that important in real life. The main phrase "read, modify, and share the code" sounds good but if we really look into it...

• Read. This is good if you are familiar with the project. Any non-trivial project is very hard to understand unless you spend a week just to get an overall idea. However, the availability of source code is an advantage because you have an option to read it if you really want to. A slight disadvantage is that good functional applications could be frowned upon because coding conventions or some other aspects of the project structure are not "right" according to the reader.
• Modify. As iansjack pointed out, how many times have you actually modified something? As far as I understand, the vast majority of users just use the released versions "as is" with no modifications. Here we are talking about modifications that must be done at source code level so please be careful not to mix this with normal customizations that may be available in a much more author-approved way, e.g. configuration files, plug-ins, etc.
• Share. Now we are at it. This is the most important one when it comes to normal users. It boils down to "I get it free", i.e. it does not cost me anything.

If we think about congigure-and-make build systems, there are many benefits like portability and flexible installations that are seen as an advantage, and they really are despite the fact that these build system implementations often are far from ideal. What if, just an example, we had those same advantages but you could not actually see the source code? You could build the system on your favorite architecture and all the other portability advantages of the configure-and-make system. Maybe it hightlights that we do not actually miss that readable source code as much as it may first seem?

[zdz]

2016. People talking about XP.

The source code is not available, so no one can change the behaviour of Windows, except if someone is a very skilled hacker that knows how to edit hex codes.

Which is illegal.

If you keep your code for youself it is not...

That is true, although Linux does also attempt to target business users, casual users, and gamers in addition to technical users.

That argument was in regard of Windows actually targetting those users thus having a higher risk of braking something with an update, because you can't be prepared for such a high variety of configuration.

We've already established that you are crap at configuring Windows. Let's not go there again.

These posts are so funny

@Antti: but if I don't read the source code how can I be sure that it is of higher quality?!

[onlyonemac]

It's clearly not a hardware problem, because I subsequently used Linux every day on that system for about a year with no problems.

If you installed Linux replacing Windows, you probably repaired the problem by overwriting the failed sectors on the hard disk. Hard disks will relocate failed sectors to a reserved area when they are overwritten.

If you dual-booted that computer, you weren't even using the failed portion of the hard disk.

The SMART data on the hard disk said there was nothing wrong with it.

[onlyonemac]

When I did that it opened a second window.

Again, the fact that you have screwed up your Windows installation is not something I have any control over.

This is a new Windows 10 virtual machine. Don't just assume that everything that ever goes wrong with any of my or my friends' Windows systems is because one of us "screwed it up".

[onlyonemac]

In my experience there's also less need for one to change the behaviour of Linux

In other words, the argument about being able to change the operating system is a red herring.

But the argument about Linux being better isn't. The only reason why we don't need to change Linux is because it works properly in the first place; if we could change Windows then there are plenty of things that we would have changed.

[onlyonemac]

The source code is not available, so no one can change the behaviour of Windows, except if someone is a very skilled hacker that knows how to edit hex codes.

Which is illegal.

If you keep your code for youself it is not...

It's still illegal to reverse-enginner/disassemble the software and modify it, even if you keep the modifications to yourself. Practically every proprietary software licence agreement prohibits disassembly, and whether you're using a tool to perform the disassembly or disassembling it in your head as you read the hex codes makes no difference because you're still disassembling it (and using the disassembly to produce a modified version).

On a personal level, I don't have any problem with people reverse-engineering/disassembling proprietary software, because usually the proprietary software's crap and the people modifying it make it a lot better, but it's still an illegal activity which shouldn't be necessary (and which shouldn't be used in an argument that "we can change the behaviour of Windows").

[iansjack]

When I did that it opened a second window.

Again, the fact that you have screwed up your Windows installation is not something I have any control over.

This is a new Windows 10 virtual machine. Don't just assume that everything that ever goes wrong with any of my or my friends' Windows systems is because one of us "screwed it up".

When your Windows installation behaves differently to everyone else's I think it is a reasonable assumption that you have screwed it up. Either that or you are just making things up.

[iansjack]

But the argument about Linux being better isn't. The only reason why we don't need to change Linux is because it works properly in the first place

That certainly explains why Linux is so much more popular on the desktop than Windows.

[iansjack]

It's still illegal to reverse-enginner/disassemble the software and modify it, even if you keep the modifications to yourself.

Once again - Fail. US and EU law, which probably covers most of us, explicitly allows reverse engineering for personal use. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_engineering

[Solar]

But the argument about Linux being better isn't. The only reason why we don't need to change Linux is because it works properly in the first place

That certainly explains why Linux is so much more popular on the desktop than Windows.

Nice try at twisting the argument around twice.

The reasons why Windows still reigns the desktop are quickly enumerated:

• It's still coming preinstalled on new machines, unless you are actively looking for alternatives. While I would make an argument of using Linux being easier than using Windows, installing Linux is not as easy as just using the Windows that's already installed.
• Sometimes you need help, with any system. Windows is what most people are using, right? So it's easier to get help when your Windows acts up, right? (Wrong, but that's what people are thinking.)
• Games. (See 1) and 2) above about the existing options that Steam @ Linux and Wine / Playonlinux give you today.)

Again: Microsoft is enjoying the position they have not because of technological superiority, but because they shoulder their way onto your system before you even bought it, and then spread FUD about your options.

(Just this weekend I repaired a faulty Windows installation. A sticker on the laptop read, "you may not be able to use all features unless you are using Windows". FUD added at the assembly line. You can't really fight that crap.)

[glauxosdever]

Hi,

But fettering yourself to the dictatorship of the FSF, when it comes to the concept of freedom, is no kind of freedom.

You say it's dictatorship. On the other side I don't consider FSF like it.

I cannot do with Linux what I want either. I can't use their drivers in my OS without making my sources GPL, for example.

I agree here, that's why my code is not GPL.

In my experience there's also less need for one to change the behaviour of Linux, because it behaves better than Windows out-of-the-box (and what it doesn't do right can normally be changed through a configuration file).

My Debian installation needed a bit of tweaking to set my native screen resolution (guess what, I needed to install non-free Linux firmware for that).

I'm not even going to touch on that secret agencies stuff, but I'll say it again: Intel and AMD are able to build backdoors directly in the CPU! SGX is just a way for NSA to hide better.

NSAKEY?

Let's face it. We don't have the Windows source code. We can't be sure that whatever you say is the reality. Of course, the same applies to whatever I say. But people out there have done some investigation. So with proprietary software is not illogical to assume the worst. SGX is worrisome too, by the way.

I know that I'm a bit inconsistent since, while I don't like proprietary software/firmware, I installed it to set my native screen resolution.

The reasons why Windows still reigns the desktop are quickly enumerated:

• It's still coming preinstalled on new machines, unless you are actively looking for alternatives. While I would make an argument of using Linux being easier than using Windows, installing Linux is not as easy as just using the Windows that's already installed.
• Sometimes you need help, with any system. Windows is what most people are using, right? So it's easier to get help when your Windows acts up, right? (Wrong, but that's what people are thinking.)
• Games. (See 1) and 2) above about the existing options that Steam @ Linux and Wine / Playonlinux give you today.)

Again: Microsoft is enjoying the position they have not because of technological superiority, but because they shoulder their way onto your system before you even bought it, and then spread FUD about your options.

(Just this weekend I repaired a faulty Windows installation. A sticker on the laptop read, "you may not be able to use all features unless you are using Windows". FUD added at the assembly line. You can't really fight that crap.)

Obviously. I have experienced that it comes preinstalled on new machines, and the FUD added at assembly line, specifically the one you quoted.


Regards,
glauxosdever

[iansjack]

Just this weekend I repaired a faulty Windows installation. A sticker on the laptop read, "you may not be able to use all features unless you are using Windows". FUD added at the assembly line. You can't really fight that crap.

You really can. You just buy computers that don't come with Windows pre-installed. It's really not too difficult. But you can't get around the fact that more hardware works, out of the box, with Windows than with any other OS. Hardware manufacturers always supply Windows drivers, sometimes OS X drivers, and sometimes Linux drivers. It's simply the law of Supply and Demand in action.

I really get tired of all this whining that Windows is forced upon you. It isn't. Most computers come with Windows pre-installed, but it's not a given, and the reason is that most consumers want Windows. If you don't want Windows then buy a Mac or just buy a PC with no pre-installed OS. That's what I do. But don't tell other people that they shouldn't buy what they want.

[glauxosdever]

Hi,

You just buy computers that don't come with Windows pre-installed. It's really not too difficult.

Even my mum wanted a computer without an installed OS, so she could install Windows 7. All computers had Windows 8.1 or Windows 10.


Regards,
glauxosdever

[iansjack]

Wouldn't it be nice to get back to the original topic of this thread! Unfortunately I can't see the anti-Windows propagandists allowing that to happen.