Can Linux learn anything from Windows 10?

What can Windows 10 teach Linux?

Microsoft’s Windows 10 operating system is available as a preview release. One Linux user at Network World decided to take the plunge and see if there was anything Windows 10 had to teach Linux.

Bryan Lunduke reports for Network World:

Really, I’m asking (myself) two questions here: 1. Is there anything awesome in Windows 10 that Linux can learn from? 2. Are there enough awesome things in Windows 10 that I, as a Linux user, am missing out on by not running it as my primary operating system?

Short answer: No.

Long answer: Are you kidding me? I couldn’t repartition that drive fast enough and re-install Linux.

…Cortana was just not fun to use. And I’m not bashing it for lack of functionality (this is still a “Technical Preview” of Windows 10, after all) or bugginess (though it was plenty buggy). My issue with this feature is that using it to do just about anything was significantly slower than using a mouse, keyboard, or touchscreen to accomplish the same tasks.

The second feature that is almost fantastic (emphasis on “almost”) is the Windows Store…there’s simply not a lot of software available, as it’s limited to “Metro” style applications (read: not classic Windows software). This takes what could be an amazing feature and makes it rather…meh.

More at Network World

Readers of Bryan Lunduke’s article shared their thoughts:

Brian Mason: “I must say, its good to see people trying a new os thats in preview and then cutting it down. Hmmm….. lets try that on linux shall we? If you want to get a good feel on what a new os has …. wait for the final release. Dont judge it before its final version. Things change and improve or get removed as the case maybe.”

Cipnr Korvo: “I’d say, the real problem Windows 10 poses for Linux/alt-OS users is that they have changed their policy to allow OEMs to block the BIOS so only “secure” OSs are allowed. Most Linux distros and all custom distros are considered “insecure”, so once again, money-driven decisions are done in the name of “security”. Depending how this goes, it might become harder to find Linux-compatible devices, and what’s for sure is you won’t be able to go in and buy any computer to turn it into a Linux/alt-OS machine (unless Microsoft comes back on this decision before launching Windows 10)”

P-Lord Swiz: “I applaud your bravery in doing doing the unthinkable. The age of windows is dying and linux is standing tall… microsoft knows this that’s why they are offer Windows 10 for free to draw people back to the windows platform since free worked so well for google and linux distros…They are bleeding out slowing and i am kind of enjoying it.”

Michael Hall: “”Metro” apps, as far as I know, are all written in .Net and use the CLR, which means that Windows can control what they can and can’t do. This means that Microsoft can allow them into the store without worrying about them being malicious, because even bad actors wouldn’t be capable of doing any harm outside of their own app.”

Raxcental Ruthenta: “First off, this is a technical preview. So cortana is not likely to be fast yet. Speed will come later. Next, the store is meant only to be metro apps. These apps a designed for touch based pcs and tablets. If the store is supposed to be compatible for all platforms, then what would happen if you tried to download and run a standard application from the store on a windows phone or xbox one?”

More at Network World

Is the Linux server market disappearing?

The Linux job market has been red hot for years now, but a writer at TechRepublic notes that this has happened while the server market has begun to disappear. Is he right about the Linux server market?

Matt Asay reports for TechRepublic:

According to a new Dice report, the Linux job market remains sizzling hot. Nearly every single hiring manager surveyed (97%) expects to hire more Linux talent relative to other skills areas in the next six months. In fact, Linux jobs growth outpaces Linux server growth.

While IDC pegs Linux server market share at 28.5% in early 2014, a climb of 4.5% over the previous year, market share doesn’t tell the whole story behind Linux jobs growth. To understand the continued rise in demand for Linux professionals, it’s important to look beyond revenue-based market share.

The cloud is eating the traditional server vendor. In the future, it’s very likely that we’ll talk more than ever for the crushing need for Linux expertise in the job market, without there being much of a paid Linux server market to speak of.

More at TechRepublic

Linux redditors took issue with the idea of the Linux server market going away:

ClickHereForBacardi: “The server isn’t disappearing. It’s just being renamed “cloud infrastructure.”

CaptSpify_is_Awesome: “Just like Netflix keeps claiming that they “don’t have a data center”. Sure they do, they just outsourced it.”

Regeya: “I remember facepalming a few years ago, listening to some journalist on a well-known podcast going on about cloud computing and the limitless potential, unlimited storage and computing power, blah blah blah, and I’m thinking…dude, it’s a marketing term for things like data centers. It’s still limited, it’s just that you’re paying someone else to handle it.”

D4rch0n: “Well, it’s limited by your wallet alone. How much do you want to store? How much money do you have? Until you’re at facebook status, or have other reasons for needing the performance of real server hardware, you can pretty much base your entire business’s infrastructure around something like AWS.”

Toaster13: “Cloud” is also about 10x more expensive than doing it yourself. Most aws instance types cost you, in a few months, what equivalent hardware would cost you outright. Once you need a dozen full time systems of any appreciable size you’re just throwing money away.”

More at Reddit

Will Microsoft ever open source Windows?

Microsoft has tried hard to change its image in the media from being thought of as very critical of open source to being perceived as wildly enthusiastic about it. But will the company ever consider open sourcing its Windows operating system? There have been a few stories circulating in the tech media that explore the question of an open source version of Windows.

Paul Krill reports for InfoWorld:

During a technology panel session in Silicon Valley, Microsoft’s Mark Russinovich, CTO for the company’s Azure cloud platform, did what Microsoft officials have been prone to doing in recent years: Preach Microsoft’s conversion from open source skeptic to proponent

Panel moderator Cade Metz, business editor at Wired, asked Russinovich if Windows itself might eventually be made open source, which elicited loud applause from the audience. “It’s definitely possible,” Russinovich responded. “Like I said, it’s a new Microsoft.” The company is having every conversation that could be imagined about what to do with its software and services, he said.

The notion of Microsoft ever open-sourcing its commercially licensed Windows OS has been broached before, to no avail. Of course, it’s easy for a company official to acknowledge the possibility during a technology conference filled with developers who would love to see Microsoft go this route. But actually doing it is likely another story.

More at InfoWorld

Back in January, Chris Babcock at Information Week noted that he erred in an earlier prediction that Windows would go open source:

Six years ago, InformationWeek predicted in a cover story, “Why Windows Must Go Open Source,” that Microsoft would loosen its grip on the Windows source code, a foray that was greeted with hoots, Bronx cheers, and a fortunately unrecorded response from then-CEO Steve Ballmer.

I recognize how wisely I backed off a step and said Windows will never exactly resemble Linux open source code. Rather, Microsoft would fight to protect its all-important developers and application base. To do so, Windows was going to have to take on more open source-like characteristics, such as being incredibly inexpensive to use for development.

It’s clear I erred in saying Windows must go open source, if I meant the desktop and server operating system was about to go open source in 2009, 2010, or some date soon after (or even if I meant it was going to go open source in the next six years). It hasn’t happened. But in fact, I also wisely didn’t predict a time frame for when such an event had to occur. Like the best crystal-ball gazers in the Tashkent bazaar, my bold prediction was accompanied by a loophole through which I could wiggle if someone tried to pin me down. I avoided saying when.

More at Information Week

Back in May of last year, Preston Gralla at Computerworld examined the idea that Windows had already been “too open” according to former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer:

You may think that Windows represents the exact opposite of open source, but Microsoft’s ex-CEO Steve Ballmer begs to differ. One of Microsoft’s biggest mistakes, he told an audience at Oxford University, was in making Windows too open. Is he right about it?

He’s confusing two very different concepts of openness. Windows has never been open source, never available for free, and people have never been allowed to change the code for free and do with it what they wanted. So in that way, Windows was never open. Even now that Microsoft has decided to give away Windows for free to makers of devices under nine inches, it’s still not open.

…Microsoft certainly was more open with Windows than Apple ever was with its operating systems, but not necessarily because of extensibility. Apple refuses to license its operating systems, while Microsoft built its company on licensing its operating systems and getting developers to write applications for them.

More at Computerworld

Did you miss a roundup? Check the Eye On Open home page to get caught up with the latest news about open source and Linux.