Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 11th Jul 2017 22:27 UTC, submitted by dionicio
Windows

Today, we're excited to announce that Canonical's Ubuntu Linux Distro is now available in the Windows Store and can be downloaded and installed on any Windows Insider build >= #16215!

Eventually this will be available to all regular Windows 10 users.

Order by: Score:
Comment by flanque
by flanque on Tue 11th Jul 2017 23:06 UTC
flanque
Member since:
2005-12-15

Might be a way for Windows 10 Cloud Edition to run Chrome. :-)

Reply Score: 3

the end of the world
by unclefester on Tue 11th Jul 2017 23:32 UTC
unclefester
Member since:
2007-01-13

I'd love to see Stecve Ballmer's reaction to this!

Reply Score: 4

RE: the end of the world
by leech on Wed 12th Jul 2017 03:27 UTC in reply to "the end of the world"
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

I'd love to see Stecve Ballmer's reaction to this!


"Linux! Linux! Linux!" - Throwing Chair Ballmer

Reply Score: 3

RE: the end of the world
by Stephen! on Sun 16th Jul 2017 11:55 UTC in reply to "the end of the world"
Stephen! Member since:
2007-11-24

I'd love to see Steve Ballmer's reaction to this!


It's not as if they're advocating that people download it from the Windows Store, install it and run it instead of Windows.

Or even like BeOS 5 Personal Edition, where it executed from within Windows, then rebooted into BeOS.

Edited 2017-07-16 11:55 UTC

Reply Score: 2

still meh
by mojmir on Wed 12th Jul 2017 07:05 UTC
mojmir
Member since:
2009-01-05

i tried it, and combination win + cygwin is still the best for daily work.

Reply Score: 3

RE: still meh
by avgalen on Wed 12th Jul 2017 07:14 UTC in reply to "still meh"
avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

i tried it, and combination win + cygwin is still the best for daily work.

Cygwin works completely different from WSFL. Cygwin requires recompilation from source for Windows. WSFL runs the native Linux versions without recompiling.
If you have the sources (not everything that runs on Linux is Open Source!) and don't mind recompiling Cygwin will probably work better.

Reply Score: 4

avgalen
Member since:
2010-09-23

whenever someone tells you "I don't use Store Apps. They are all toy-versions of Win32 programs that only noobs and kids use" the counter is "thank you for agreeing that Linux is only for noobs and kids"

;)

Actually it helps my development a lot. Being able to run a real Linux Shell and Visual Studio at the same time accessing the same files simultaneously. Microsoft really delivered with Windows Subsystem for Linux, basically building something like Wine in a very short period

Reply Score: 2

judgen Member since:
2006-07-12

I have never heard that argument. I mostly hear that they are dirt ugly apps, has limited functionality compared to the "full" application and lack UI consitency.

Reply Score: 2

avgalen Member since:
2010-09-23

uhm, I would consider

limited functionality compared to the "full" application
and
toy-versions of Win32 programs
the same argument.

I have never understood the UI consistency thing. VLC, Windows Media Player, Itunes, WinAmp all are the same class of apllications and look entirely different. I personally think most apps look a lot nicer than most programs. (with apps being store-apps and programs being classic Win32 executables)

Reply Score: 2

dionicio Member since:
2006-07-12

Same as For Wine: Extending SHARED use of a Coding Effort -Wherever it's happening.

Could say it also on money-ese: .gov, .edu, .mil up to a support systems degree.

Edited 2017-07-12 15:21 UTC

Reply Score: 2

ssokolow Member since:
2010-01-21

Microsoft really delivered with Windows Subsystem for Linux, basically building something like Wine in a very short period


Three things really helped there:

1. The Windows NT kernel was designed for this from the start. (Win32 and WSL are pluggable API subsystems, written against a kernel which was originally intended to have Win32, OS/2, and POSIX subsystems for competitive reasons.)

2. Linux is open-source and presents a relatively simple and compact kernel API compared to the massive pile of legacy support Microsoft is carrying around.

3. The entire Ubuntu userland is open-source and licensed in a fashion that allows reuse on top of any kernel.

Microsoft basically pulled ReactOS's "take Wine's userland and write adapters" trick, but without being bogged down by having to write a whole new kernel.

(eg. Wine has to reinvent Microsoft's standard library and the like. Microsoft took advantage of the fact that, in many cases, borrowing Ubuntu's glibc acted as an abstraction layer, reducing the API surface they needed to replicate.)

Edited 2017-07-12 15:36 UTC

Reply Score: 3

dionicio Member since:
2006-07-12

"...written against a kernel which was originally intended to have Win32, OS/2, and POSIX subsystems for competitive reasons."

Always suspected Microsoft thinker-ed formerly as an ecosystem [still not so sure].

Reply Score: 2

Sidux Member since:
2015-03-10

Most of the hate comes from admins / developers that no longer have the ability to block windows store due to company restriction policies (same as disabling One Drive integration with Office 360).
Besides this I do hope Windows Store will get some more love in future. If not for enhanced workflows but just for getting rid of all those separate automatic updates.

Reply Score: 1

Game changer
by Adurbe on Wed 12th Jul 2017 09:41 UTC
Adurbe
Member since:
2005-07-06

This is a massive change for development workflows but also enterprise usgae by those who needed to support linux desktops for devs. Now, give them Win10 and install linux Without breaking support contracts.

Reply Score: 3

Not really Linux ?
by bugjacobs on Thu 13th Jul 2017 14:25 UTC
bugjacobs
Member since:
2009-01-03

Isnt Linux the kernel ?
This is just BASH ..

Id like the full KDE and Dolphin running ontop of NT :-)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Not really Linux ?
by mistersoft on Thu 13th Jul 2017 15:19 UTC in reply to "Not really Linux ?"
mistersoft Member since:
2011-01-05

Not as much as I'd like to see Windows(tm) drivers services running atop the Linux kernel.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Not really Linux ?
by ssokolow on Thu 13th Jul 2017 16:52 UTC in reply to "Not really Linux ?"
ssokolow Member since:
2010-01-21

For lack of a better term, "Linux" has become overloaded to mean both "Linux, the kernel" and "Linux, the ABI that is required for 'thing X' to run".

In the latter sense, the limits of how far "Linux" stretches are fuzzy but normally mean "The Linux kernel, plus anything which can present a glibc-compatible ABI and possibly an X11 server".

The problem is that, given that fuzziness, I can easily see the Linux kernel requirement being broadened to also include "anything which presents the userland from a genuine Linux distro on top of a Linux-compatible kernel ABI emulation".

TL;DR: Because "Linux, the execution environment" is so amorphous, I fear the term is going to get diluted to hell and back.

Edited 2017-07-13 16:53 UTC

Reply Score: 3