OSNews: http://www.osnews.com/story/26047/Microsoft_to_run_Linux_on_Azure Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2013, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Thu, 20 Jun 2013 10:24:27 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif OSNews.com http://www.osnews.com Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521097 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521097 Microsoft wants YOU to pay THEM for the privilege of running a Linux distribution of THEIR choice in a virtual machine, by the hour? Uhhh... sorry, Microsoft, but f*** no.

Don't they already get enough money off of virtually every PC sold with the Windows tax, virtually every Android phone sold through the Microsoft patent tax, and soon enough off of every single ARM-based tablet, laptop and desktop that will come with Windows 8? And of course, that's not counting their somewhat legitimate sources of income, including the Xbox 360 and phones that were designed around their Windows Phone/Windows Mobile OS?

What a joke.Edited 2012-06-07 02:09 UTC Thu, 07 Jun 2012 02:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (UltraZelda64) Comments RE: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521106 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521106 Actually where have YOU been? MSFT has been making money off of Linux for a couple of years now, which is why Ballmer hasn't been saying much about it. they have been offering SUSE licenses with their WinServer and hyper-V products for awhile now. This is just an extension of what they've already been doing. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 03:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (bassbeast) Comments RE: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521107 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521107 It's not a joke, it's for companies that are already buying Azure for Windows Server and are going to spend money on Linux web servers so they might as well write one check. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 03:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (nt_jerkface) Comments RE: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521109 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521109
Don't they already get enough money


Maybe you don't agree or understand the basics of why companies exist, but making more money is pretty high on the list of things to do.

if you choose MS Azure, its really you that have chosen the VM. I don't think there will be many takers over Amazon Cloud, but that might be a good way to have a little better redundancy that what a single provider can give. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 03:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Bill Shooter of Bul) Comments RE[2]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521110 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521110 Forgot about the whole Novell agreement and SUSE controversy. That happened quite a while ago. Either way, I in no way claimed to write the whole god damn story down... I just gave a few examples that quickly came to mind. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 03:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (UltraZelda64) Comments RE[2]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521111 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521111
"Don't they already get enough money

Maybe you don't agree or understand the basics of why companies exist, but making more money is pretty high on the list of things to do. "


Jump at conclusions enough? Know a thing about reading comprehension?

Nice job at taking the very first part of what I said, automatically assume I don't know what I'm talking about based on just that, and go on as if I don't know how companies operate and why they exist in the first place.

How about you read the rest of what I said, make an attempt to comprehend it without jumping to conclusions, and then respond?

In case you still can't figure it out, I am slamming Microsoft's monopolistic and abusive business tactics and their sleazy ways of making money for things that THEY HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH, often under empty "patent" threats. Next thing you know, they're going to want you to pay them to buy something that doesn't even run Microsoft software. Oh, wait... [get the point?]Edited 2012-06-07 03:46 UTC Thu, 07 Jun 2012 03:40:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (UltraZelda64) Comments RE: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521117 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521117 Yes. That's how public clouds work. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 04:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Nelson) Comments RE[3]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521118 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521118 They're hosting the fucking infrastructure, providing up time guarantees, keeping the machines patched and up to date, and allowing you to scale out as needed.

You're utterly and completely indoctrinated. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 04:11:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Nelson) Comments RE: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521121 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521121
Microsoft wants YOU to pay THEM for the privilege of running a Linux distribution of THEIR choice in a virtual machine, by the hour? Uhhh... sorry, Microsoft, but f*** no.


You're free not to use it.
For Microsoft this is probably the smartest thing they could have done. Windows in the cloud is incredibly awkward and if they want people to use Azure they have to offer an alternative. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 04:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Soulbender) Comments RE[4]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521125 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521125
They're hosting the fucking infrastructure, providing up time guarantees, keeping the machines patched and up to date, and allowing you to scale out as needed.


I'm curious how much, if any, money they gave to the companies behind the GNU/Linux distributions they offer. I understand that GPL licensed software can be -- and often is -- sold or otherwise used to generate income, despite the fact that it is a free/Free commodity. I just wonder if Microsoft is maximizing their profits by leeching off of other tech giants. It certainly wouldn't be the first time.

I also wonder if they are following the Almighty and Holy GPL to the letter. It would be a shame if they were leveraging Free software by violating its license agreement, while strongly enforcing their own EULAs as usual. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 05:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Morgan) Comments RE[5]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521129 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521129
I'm curious how much, if any, money they gave to the companies behind the GNU/Linux distributions they offer.


I'm guessing there's a reason RHEL is not included.

I also wonder if they are following the Almighty and Holy GPL to the letter.


Unless they make any changes to the distros they are. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 05:25:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Soulbender) Comments RE[6]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521131 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521131
Unless they make any changes to the distros they are.


That's kind of what I'm wondering, would they have to make any changes to the distros to integrate them into the Azure system? I don't know that much about Azure so I have no idea. In the past Microsoft has shied away from Free software in part because of the restrictions of the GPL.

As much as I dislike the GPL itself, I understand its necessity and I hope Microsoft abides by it if they do have to alter the software. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 05:30:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Morgan) Comments RE[7]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521135 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521135
That's kind of what I'm wondering, would they have to make any changes to the distros to integrate them into the Azure system? I don't know that much about Azure so I have no idea. In the past Microsoft has shied away from Free software in part because of the restrictions of the GPL.

As much as I dislike the GPL itself, I understand its necessity and I hope Microsoft abides by it if they do have to alter the software.


I very much doubt that they have to alter the software. They probably just have to change some configuration files. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 07:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Sodki) Comments RE[5]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521136 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521136 One datapoint suggesting that they are playing ball: http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2166123/microsoft-contribu... Thu, 07 Jun 2012 07:06:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (vaette) Comments RE: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521137 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521137
Microsoft wants YOU to pay THEM for the privilege of running a Linux distribution of THEIR choice in a virtual machine, by the hour? Uhhh... sorry, Microsoft, but f*** no.


No, Microsoft want you to pay for renting there hardware and cloud infrastructure. You are free to use linux in a VM at home or in your private cloud.
Amazon is doing the same.

What is new is that MS allows you to use linux on there cloud.

If anything, this is MS way to say that Windows is not convincing enough for cloud computing.

Except that all they offer is the same as Amazon + the ability to use windows in the cloud.

I would still use Amazon because of interoperability with private clouds. I don't know any private cloud infrastructure that supports Azure API. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 07:19:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (dragos.pop) Comments Er, buy a VPS from dozens of other vendors instead http://www.osnews.com/thread?521138 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521138 Last year, I started renting a VPS in the US for $5 a month and am still paying it regularly via auto-Paypal:

1GB RAM
Quad Core CPU
30GB disk space
64-bit CentOS 6
Huge bandwidth per month (1500 TB or something mad)
Full root access
Can install and run anything that's legal

Tell me how the Microsoft Azure setup beats that in any way, especially at $5 a month? Hourly pay as you go - what the freak?! Thu, 07 Jun 2012 07:26:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (rklrkl) Comments RE: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521139 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521139 How is that different than what Amazon does with AWS, and tons of other cloud providers as well?

You're paying for the infrastructure service they offer. They handle the hardware, power, storage, etc. parts. That cost them money. That's why they are asking to be paid for the service.

You would expect them to provide you with hardware for free? Thu, 07 Jun 2012 07:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (mlaporte) Comments RE: Er, buy a VPS from dozens of other vendors instead http://www.osnews.com/thread?521141 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521141 Allows rapid scaling up or down of services. Its more cost efficient. Good for services with varying degrees of load. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 07:50:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Nelson) Comments RE[2]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521143 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521143
For Microsoft this is probably the smartest thing they could have done. Windows in the cloud is incredibly awkward and if they want people to use Azure they have to offer an alternative.

Yes, Windows in the "cloud" is incredibly awkward... which is why running Windows 8 with a Microsoft Passport instead of a traditional account feels so... wrong. Just as much as paying Microsoft to run Linux distributions in a VM on their "cloud" is.

Yes, fair enough, poor joke--but still, cloud ANYTHING sucks. Of course, that's just my opinion. And paying Microsoft to run a third-party OS that they slammed to hell and back with empty patent threats (and are now profiting off of these very threats) and called a "cancer" just seems like a joke.

Sure, it's their servers you're running it on, but everything else all added up just makes it seem... completely wrong. It's not that hard to download a virtual machine program and install the distro yourself... and you won't be restricted to the four that Microsoft has, for whatever reason after all their threats of Linux in general, decided to bless. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 08:06:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (UltraZelda64) Comments RE: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521146 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521146
Microsoft wants YOU to pay THEM for the privilege of running a Linux distribution of THEIR choice in a virtual machine, by the hour? Uhhh... sorry, Microsoft, but f*** no.


How different is this from IBM and Oracle clouds for Linux?


Don't they already get enough money off of virtually every PC sold with the Windows tax, virtually every Android phone sold through the Microsoft patent tax, and soon enough off of every single ARM-based tablet, laptop and desktop that will come with Windows 8? And of course, that's not counting their somewhat legitimate sources of income, including the Xbox 360 and phones that were designed around their Windows Phone/Windows Mobile OS?

What a joke.


Microsoft abuses a lot their position on the market, but if one sees it without taking sides, Microsoft is no different from any other driven by profit corporation. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 08:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (moondevil) Comments RE[2]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521147 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521147
I would still use Amazon because of interoperability with private clouds. I don't know any private cloud infrastructure that supports Azure API.


The company I work for, has a few customers doing Azure based projects. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 08:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (moondevil) Comments RE[3]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521148 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521148
Just as much as paying Microsoft to run Linux distributions in a VM on their "cloud" is.


So you're saying that they shouldn't charge anything for the service if you run Linux? That's like saying you shouldn't have to pay for your hardware if you run Linux.

It's not that hard to download a virtual machine program and install the distro yourself


The target audience for this service isn't people who wan't to test out a distro and play around with it.
It's about running servers on the (supposedly) high-availability Azure service. It's for companies that have Windows servers on Azure but their Linux servers somewhere else (like EC2) or those who have stayed away from Azure due to the lack of non-Windows support. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Soulbender) Comments RE: Er, buy a VPS from dozens of other vendors instead http://www.osnews.com/thread?521149 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521149 Azure is reasonably competitive with Amazons services, which is really the competition here. For small stuff nothing beats a simple VPS for flexibility, but there is more to these things. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:13:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (vaette) Comments RE: Er, buy a VPS from dozens of other vendors instead http://www.osnews.com/thread?521150 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521150
Quad Core CPU


On a VPS you don't get a Quad Core CPU to yourself, you share it with the other VPS' on the same machine.

Tell me how the Microsoft Azure setup beats that in any way

It doesn't, you can get exactly the same thing on Azure.
The pricing is different though. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:21:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Soulbender) Comments Good 'ole Microsoft. http://www.osnews.com/thread?521151 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521151 Embrace, Extend and... eh... what was the last E again? Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:25:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (znby) Comments RE: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521153 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521153 Do you share the same opinion about Amazon Cloud instances? Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sithlord2) Comments RE[3]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521154 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521154 So when they offer a choice between Linux and Windows on Azure, they are "abusing their monopoly"?

Oh BTW, since when does MS have a monopoly on Cloud Services?? The market is quite big, you know (Google, Amaon, Rackspace, Linode,...). Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sithlord2) Comments RE[6]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521167 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521167 It's interesting to see that they are contributing more than Canonical. Thank you for posting that! Thu, 07 Jun 2012 11:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Morgan) Comments RE[8]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521168 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521168 If I had to guess, I would say they would at the very least have to modify some kernel source files to roll in support for Azure-specific features, but as I said I'm not that familiar with Azure so I may be talking out of my ass.

Regardless, based on the link provided by vaette it looks like they are cooperating with the GPL and that makes me happy. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 11:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Morgan) Comments RE: Good 'ole Microsoft. http://www.osnews.com/thread?521169 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521169 Exit these comments. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 12:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Nelson) Comments RE[3]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521172 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521172 Supporting Linux on their cloud computing is not related to their repeated abuses of monopolistic behavior. At least not yet.

Now if IE could only connect to websites that were hosted by azure, then that would be an abuse and your comment would have made sense.

If they were sending bills to every company that ran linux installs in the cloud, that would be an abuse. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 12:37:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Bill Shooter of Bul) Comments RE[9]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521177 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521177
If I had to guess, I would say they would at the very least have to modify some kernel source files to roll in support for Azure-specific features


They could just provide a binary driver, like nVidia does. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 13:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Soulbender) Comments RE: Er, buy a VPS from dozens of other vendors instead http://www.osnews.com/thread?521179 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521179 Who is your VPS hosting provider? That's cheap! Thu, 07 Jun 2012 14:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (mgarba) Comments RE: Er, buy a VPS from dozens of other vendors instead http://www.osnews.com/thread?521180 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521180
Last year, I started renting a VPS in the US for $5 a month and am still paying it regularly via auto-Paypal:

1GB RAM
Quad Core CPU
30GB disk space
64-bit CentOS 6
Huge bandwidth per month (1500 TB or something mad)
Full root access
Can install and run anything that's legal


That's a fantastic deal, please could you give me the URL for the provider as I'm currently looking for the a VPS myself.

Best I've found so far is this http://www.minivps.co.uk/openvzvps.php but your deal blows that out of the water! Thu, 07 Jun 2012 14:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Modafinil) Comments RE[7]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521185 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521185 The GPL is a copyright license. It doesn't matter if they make changes to the distributions. As long as Microsoft doesn't redistribute their changes they are under no obligation to provide their source code changes. Since their service is a cloud based on (ie the distros run on their computers) the GPL does not apply. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 14:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (jessesmith) Comments RE[8]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521188 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521188
Since their service is a cloud based on (ie the distros run on their computers) the GPL does not apply.


Fair enough, but I would argue that Microsoft is still distributing the software, even if you are using it in an instanced mode. You still buy a license from Microsoft, you still use their altered version...how is that any different from the software shipping on a device or boxed in a retail store?

Regardless, as has been pointed out elsewhere Microsoft does seem to be playing by the rules. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 15:19:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Morgan) Comments RE[2]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521203 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521203 I think the only difference is the inherent hate to Linux from Microsoft, and their historic effort to hinder any Linux advancement. But in this case they had to swallow their anger, since they are getting money in the end. While Oracle isn't a nice company either, they never considered Linux a primary enemy.Edited 2012-06-07 16:18 UTC Thu, 07 Jun 2012 16:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (shmerl) Comments RE: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521214 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521214
Microsoft wants YOU to pay THEM for the privilege of running a Linux distribution of THEIR choice in a virtual machine, by the hour? Uhhh... sorry, Microsoft, but f*** no.


You realize that this is the same thing Amazon's EC2 does. Its cloud computing my friend but because MSFT does it its the worst thing that could possibly happen. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 18:00:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (DarrkAssassin) Comments RE: Good 'ole Microsoft. http://www.osnews.com/thread?521215 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521215 Extinguish. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 18:00:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (tuma324) Comments RE: Er, buy a VPS from dozens of other vendors instead http://www.osnews.com/thread?521216 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521216 Where? That sounds like a good deal to me. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 18:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (backdoc) Comments RE: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521230 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521230 This is what pisses me off about people like you.

Microsoft Offers a product ... they get feedback saying they want Linux support.

And you have a little raeg cry over it, after they offer it.

Oh well if one can't recognise the strengths of the competition you are always destined to fail. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 19:10:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (lucas_maximus) Comments RE: Good 'ole Microsoft. http://www.osnews.com/thread?521252 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521252 The last E was ... "I still feel violated about shit about what happened 20 years ago" Thu, 07 Jun 2012 19:37:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (lucas_maximus) Comments RE[3]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521253 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521253 Whether or not you know what you are talking about you it is totally irrelevant to the subject at hand. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 19:39:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (lucas_maximus) Comments RE[5]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521259 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521259 You have zero evidence for either of your accusations. What is this, Fox News? Thu, 07 Jun 2012 20:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (MollyC) Comments RE[6]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521262 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521262 They aren't accusations, they are speculation based on prior experience. Others pointed out long ago in this thread that Microsoft is indeed playing by the rules regarding the second matter, and that makes me happy.

As for the other issue, I'd simply like to know. It won't affect me either way as I don't plan on using an Azure instance, I'm just curious.

Cool your jets lady, I'm not raising a Grand Inquisition against your pet company. The last I checked, we were allowed to discuss matters from several different viewpoints here; who made you dictator? Thu, 07 Jun 2012 20:27:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Morgan) Comments RE[2]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521264 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521264 You forgot (?) to mention vendors shipping Android. Supposedly Microsoft makes more money on Android per device sold (about 5 to 15 dollars a piece) than Windows Phone. Thu, 07 Jun 2012 20:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Lennie) Comments RE[7]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521293 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521293 They don't have to release their changes anymore than Google.

Google's internal build of Linux would likely have useful changes while tweaks for Azure are probably worthless to anyone but Microsoft.

You're looking at this backwards if you are a Linux fan. Not offering Linux is what should put your panties in a bunch. Fri, 08 Jun 2012 00:26:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (nt_jerkface) Comments RE[2]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521294 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521294
If anything, this is MS way to say that Windows is not convincing enough for cloud computing.


Uh no the is a way for MS to make money from mixed shops.

If you think that Windows isn't "hardcore" enough or something for cloud computing then you should update your computer knowledge base from Slashdot 1999. Watch as both their Windows and Linux offerings have similar uptimes.Edited 2012-06-08 00:33 UTC Fri, 08 Jun 2012 00:30:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (nt_jerkface) Comments RE[8]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521295 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521295 I think the distinction between Azure and Google's internal use of GNU/Linux is that with the former it is possible to run an instanced OS, which while hosted on Microsoft's servers is still fully at your disposal. I suppose the letter of the GPL is that Microsoft should only have to publish changes if they provide binaries for mass consumption, but I'd say that allowing one to install, set up and use a modified, instanced OS is doing just that. All of that is, of course, assuming Microsoft did have to change any GPL'ed software, which is still unknown.

With Google, they are using the OS completely internally (not counting Android, since I don't think that lies within the scope of what we are discussing). I would also expect Google to release any code changes if they started shipping modified binaries of their internal systems. Though, now that I think about it, there is the Chrome OS; I believe the source is available for that though.

And just to be clear, I'm not looking at it from a "fan" standpoint at all. I do care about open source software in general, and anything that positively impacts it is fine with me. But I'm no more or less a fan of Linux than I am of Windows or OS X. In fact, I'd say the only desktop OSes I truly am a flag waving, card carrying fan of are BeOS/Haiku and QNX Neutrino. Fri, 08 Jun 2012 00:39:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Morgan) Comments RE: Er, buy a VPS from dozens of other vendors instead http://www.osnews.com/thread?521297 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521297 I've had bad experiences with those "cheap" VPS providers. They claim you are guaranteed to share the same box with at most 10 users, but it turns out there are often 50 or more, and every one of them has turned their share into a torrent seedbox or ad-farming setup. Contacting support was a dead end, they just offered to wipe and reinstall my instance to fix "software issues" I wasn't actually having.

I was better off running a P4 with 1GB of RAM and a PATA drive from my home connection for free. Fri, 08 Jun 2012 00:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Morgan) Comments RE[6]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521303 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521303
One datapoint suggesting that they are playing ball:

Playing ball? It wasn't as if they chose to open source the Hyper-V Linux code as they were forced to submit it because it was discovered that they'd been shipping closed source binaries with a Hyper-V Linux network driver which used statically linked GPL-licenced code.

And the only reason they created the Linux specific virtualization drivers to begin with is because their Hyper-V customers wanted to be able to run Linux efficiently.

Please don't try to paint this as a 'Microsoft did the right thing out of their own accord' thing. Fri, 08 Jun 2012 00:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Valhalla) Comments RE[9]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521305 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521305 Please don't take offense to this, but I suspect you either don't know what distributing means or perhaps what a cloud service is. Microsoft will be running a Linux distribution on their server and keeping it on their server and giving you access to it. You are not receiving anything, not getting a copy of anything, just using their equipment. Since the customer does not receive a copy of anything there is no distribution and thus copyright does not apply. This is completely different in every way from going to a store and buying a boxed copy of software and taking it home, or downloading an ISO. In the latter case you have a copy, you can do whatever you want with it. Fri, 08 Jun 2012 01:55:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (jessesmith) Comments RE[10]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521306 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521306 No offense taken, and I realize my viewpoint is probably different from most, but the way I see it, if you're paying Microsoft for full access to an OS, you're licensing it no differently than if you installed it on your own hardware. I'm sure I'm wrong but that's just my viewpoint on it.

After all, when you turn the tables Microsoft considers installing their OS to a virtual machine to be no different than installing to bare metal. Fri, 08 Jun 2012 02:15:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Morgan) Comments RE: Good 'ole Microsoft. http://www.osnews.com/thread?521337 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521337 Exterminate... eradicate... eliminate... or the official extinguish... take your pick.

And that's just the E-words...

Ironically, being GPL software, if they extend anything in the distributions... they can't legally get away without distributing all changes to the source code. Of course... Microsoft being who they are... I wouldn't put it past them to slyly break a few more laws, and once again get away with it.Edited 2012-06-08 07:04 UTC Fri, 08 Jun 2012 07:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (UltraZelda64) Comments RE[2]: Good 'ole Microsoft. http://www.osnews.com/thread?521345 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521345 Your fanaticism really has no end. Fri, 08 Jun 2012 09:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Nelson) Comments RE[9]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521353 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521353 It's a full instance of an OS but you still only have access through an interface. The GPL would have to be modified to make interface access count as a form distribution. The current form fully allows it. Fri, 08 Jun 2012 13:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (nt_jerkface) Comments RE[3]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521365 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521365 And if the estimate of sales volume posted over at WMPoweruser is correct and they have sold 13 million licenses to handset makers and have also collected about $500 million in Android 'revenues' then they have paid almost that whole amount from both platforms to Barnes and Noble to make them drop their patent abuse suit.

Fortunately they are making money elsewhere ...Edited 2012-06-08 16:41 UTC Fri, 08 Jun 2012 16:40:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (glarepate) Comments RE[3]: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?521547 http://www.osnews.com/thread?521547
While Oracle isn't a nice company either, they never considered Linux a primary enemy.


Could it be that, because until recently they weren't selling operating systems? Just guessing... Mon, 11 Jun 2012 06:47:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (moondevil) Comments RE: Wait... am I understanding this correctly? http://www.osnews.com/thread?522094 http://www.osnews.com/thread?522094
Microsoft wants YOU to pay THEM for the privilege of running a Linux distribution of THEIR choice in a virtual machine, by the hour? Uhhh... sorry, Microsoft, but f*** no.

Ah yes, surely it can't be that other people, companies were demanding from Microsoft to offer certain services, are willing to pay for them - so Microsoft obliges, listens to what their customers want.

That just wouldn't fir with your bubble of a world view...Edited 2012-06-15 00:01 UTC Thu, 14 Jun 2012 23:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (zima) Comments