1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Microsoft vs. Linux

Discussion in 'Operating Systems' started by wet, Aug 20, 2019.

Tags:
?

How far is Microsoft prepared to go to control Linux?

Poll closed Tuesday at 5:31 PM.
  1. All the way, if allowed to

    7 vote(s)
    63.6%
  2. No way, Microsoft can be trusted

    4 vote(s)
    36.4%
  1. wet

    wet New Member

    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    Fury 9
    We expect that when Microsoft stops support for Win 7, any offer of software updates will be Apple style to stop Win 7 working properly. And since Microsoft has announced that Win 10 will be available only by annual subscription, too expensive for the average PC user, is an exit from 7 an easy choice? Except that the strategists at Microsoft who plot world domination have planned ahead, and ending support for Win 7 is a consequence of the strategy.

    Microsoft's strategy to take over Linux started a few years ago when the Microsoft key people could see that Linux was about to take the lead for a PC OS, so had to prepare Microsoft to lose the battle for control of the PC OS market or position Microsoft to be in the driving seat of Linux. At first Microsoft offered modules and bits of software missing from Linux, to be included in Linux, Trojan horse style, in return for concessions from the Linux Foundation. The concessions were to allow Microsoft to take software from Linux, especially security software that Microsoft programmers could not produce, to include in Windows. For example, the file copying process which was copied into Windows 7 without even changing the dialog box. This software exchange was done while marketing Microsoft as a new company, a services company, a modern company embracing change. What was not obvious at the time of this emerging false freindship was the strategy to take charge of Linux, that to date has been several years unfolding, to build a Windows Linux OS.

    Microsoft has paid substantial bribes to the Linux Foundation key people to hand over Linux core software, notably the security elements. However, the real trick Microsoft has pulled off is claiming intellectual property over how the Microsoft modules are used in Linux. In fact, Microsoft's claim is invalid and would not stand in any intellectual property legal challenge, because protection for intellectual property is not extended to its use once sold or given away, at least in European law. So if Microsoft specifies that it has sold you a Windows licence it cannot dictate how you use Windows on your computer. And if Microsoft dictates what the Linux Founation can do with Microsoft modules, who's going to take Microsoft to court?

    It is a very dangerous situation for Linux users, like myself, who rely on Linux to be able to get into Windows where Microsoft prevents user access to hidden parts of Windows. People who want control of their own computer, and use dual boot to have Linux and Windows, will find their LInux version unable to get into parts of the Windows filing system. That is, users will not control their own computers because evil Microsoft has taken control. As pointed out correctly by DW75 on this site, Win 10, as all Windows versions to some degree, contains a lot of software that captures information about computer hardware identity, to track web searches, and to copy internet traffic.

    My previous financial contribution to the Linux Foundation was not so that Microsoft could take control and sell a version of Linux back to me. Fu**ers. The hope is that the Linux community will rebel against the take over by Microsoft. Certainly Microsoft has positioned itself very carefully and has enormous resources to use, but the response by the community is not that difficult. Bring in the Linux gurus, hack Windows and make everything in Windows Linux available free. Then produce the software to give Linux users control over our own computers. Noli nothis permittere te terere.
     
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2019
  2. LocoDiceGR

    LocoDiceGR Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,907
    Likes Received:
    497
    GPU:
    Gigabyte R9 380 4G
    ok
     
    Alessio1989 likes this.
  3. anticupidon

    anticupidon Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,900
    Likes Received:
    692
    GPU:
    integrated
    Hello and welcome to the forums!
    Read your post was a chore, try to separate that wall of text in paragraphs. Forums post avoid walls of text.
    There are a few points taken in your post, but also a few things are presented in a hasty way if you will.

    Yes, Microsoft is a platinum member of the Linux Foundation, and money dictates what is what, to a point. The Nadella's charade of the new Microsoft loving Linux convinces the newcomers and some users, they want to stay relevant in server and cloud environment. And to stay relevant, they had to embrace Linux kernel, and Azure is their cash cow. Hidden in plain sight, they surrendered to the Linux kernel, the Windows kernel/scheduler just doesn't cut it.

    Yes, they hate Linux and without any doubt, they would erase the possibility of forking the Linux kernel and whatever open-source model that goes with it, but they can't. So many companies rely on the Linux kernel, and they will sue Microsoft out. Or better, they will fork their own kernel and no one can do a thing. If by any means, Microsoft will get to control Linux kernel, it will be forked, or people will mobe on the BSD kernel, or whatever. Or move to Android for desktop. You just can't force users to use whatever. People can't be pushed around at one company's whim.

    Windows 7 is EOL. But what does really mean for a normal user? It cant be installed, or be used?
    This topic was discussed to death, and frankly, there is no point in discussing it furthermore.

    One more thing, the only way to dual boot is to have each OS on its own HDD and installed with the other OS/HDD disconnected. If not, Microsoft Boot Manager will try to ruin your dual bot configuration. That if you arent a full Linux user yet.
     
  4. wet

    wet New Member

    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    Fury 9
    ".. the only way to dual boot is to have each OS on its own HDD and installed with the other OS/HDD disconnected. If not, Microsoft Boot Manager will try to ruin your dual bot configuration."

    Dual boot is an option when two (or more) operating systems (or versions) are installed to different partitions on a disk. In this configuration, a Linux version must be installed last.
     

  5. anticupidon

    anticupidon Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,900
    Likes Received:
    692
    GPU:
    integrated
    What I was trying to point out was "the only way" as in the best way of having each OS not interfering. And specifically dual-booting Linux and windows.
    Having dual-boot on the same HDD, there is a chance to have that ruined. Windows Boot Manager will ruin your grub, sooner or later.
    I had many dual-boot setups ruined each time Windows decided to update and break the dual boot. A simple search will reveal so many issues about this.
    But your definition of dual-booting stands correct. Just avoid the deception.
     
  6. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    20,988
    Likes Received:
    636
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    I'd like to see where MS has announced that "Windows 10 will be available only by subscription"

    Also, I'd like to point out..... If someone has purchased a copy of Windows, regardless of version, MS can not suddenly add a subscription fee to it's use. MS does not have the ability to change the EULA after sale. Since they are offering "Windows as a service" without a subscription fee, and essentially forcing updates on people....it would put them in an impossible to defend legal position by trying to enforce an annual subscription fee, after the fact. MS does not want another anti-trust suit that they can't possibly win.

    In the desktop OS market, Windows is in no danger at all of being overtaken by Linux. Windows still maintains a greater than 90% market share.
     
    386SX likes this.
  7. RealNC

    RealNC Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,987
    Likes Received:
    1,252
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX 980 Ti FTW
    If the developers of the Linux core stacks one day decide to actually make it a decent desktop/gaming platform, then Windows would indeed be in trouble. As it stands, Linux core development (kernel and base graphics infrastructure stack) is done by employees of companies that have nothing to do with desktops or gaming. They care about servers, workstations and the "cloud" only. People from time to time make a suggestion on the kernel or graphics stack developer mailing lists about adding things like "special fullscreen support for games" or improving the CPU scheduler so that you can watch movies with less frame skipping on machines without 128 64-core CPUs (yes, I'm exaggerating) and other basic things like that, and get laughed off. If it doesn't make PostgreSQL and Apache run faster, then your suggestion isn't taken seriously. IBM, RedHat and the rest aren't going to pay their devs to work on "useless" improvements.

    Microsoft on the other hand has development teams that are dedicated to things like that. There is a reason that Linux market share on the server wipes the floor with Windows, while on the desktop and gaming segment it's the other way around.

    I use both Windows and Linux, and even though for casual gaming Linux can be OK, it can't compare to Windows if you actually care about video games running at their best. Especially so if you have a "better than 60Hz" display. Higher than 60Hz gaming on Linux is an embarrassment, really. The desktops (KDE, Gnome, you name it) aren't even synced to the refresh rate like on Windows. Imagine if DWM was just using a timer-based frame limiter without any sync whatsoever. The microstutter while just watching videos at higher refresh rates would be embarrassing. But that's how Linux does it. When someone suggested to the KDE devs to fix this, he was (once again) laughed off the bug tracker ("why would we waste CPU cycles for this, the human eye can't see past 60 frames blah blah", you get the idea.)

    Microsoft is in no danger to be beaten by Linux on that front any time soon. Linux simply does not have any developers who are paid for this or even understand what is happening in modern desktops and gaming platforms.
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2019
    chinobino and yasamoka like this.
  8. wet

    wet New Member

    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    Fury 9
    sykozis has raised an important point.

    Reliable information about the cost of Windows 10 states that the subscription service for Windows 10 is for business users (howtogeek.com). Microsoft might not charge personal users to keep Windows up to date, “Windows 10 licence does not expire, it is not a subscription product” (answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/). Not so clear?

    On the same web site there is confusion, with real life examples, about what Microsoft means by 'update', 'upgrade' or Microsoft's technical support, and which is to be paid for. The answer must be from Microsoft VP Terry Myerson who revealed the strategy for "always connected PCs", requiring a subscription to Microsoft for updates and upgrades to a new Windows version every year. This means business and personal users of the service (businessinsider.com 13 Jan 2018).

    As for Linux, RealNC summed it up. Microsoft is damaging Linux by buying what it wants from Linux, to put in Windows, and putting restrictions on what Linux can do with modules from Microsoft. There is no genuine reciprocating of help for Linux and the Linux Foundation is being bribed to allow it.
     
  9. 386SX

    386SX Master Guru

    Messages:
    429
    Likes Received:
    442
    GPU:
    AMD Vega64 RedDevil
    Question: "How far is MS prepared ..."?
    Answer: "No way, MS can be trusted." :D
     
  10. anticupidon

    anticupidon Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,900
    Likes Received:
    692
    GPU:
    integrated
    There is so much to be said, yet I just can't find my words.
    People in general are sooo reticent to change, and yet so eager to whine.
    There was a time when I evangelized Linux high and low.
    Nowadays, I just don't care about proving my point.
    You have a problem with your computer?
    Well, I can help, my fee is X amount of money.
    Wanna learn about Linux and you ask for it?
    Well, I'll give the basics, and let yourself decide, just don't ask me how to run .exe in Linux or downloading torrents and other stupid crap.
     
    386SX likes this.

  11. Montville

    Montville Member Guru

    Messages:
    174
    Likes Received:
    15
    GPU:
    Aorus RX 570 4GB
    Easy Solution - MS should be limited to create its own Linux distro and barred from infecting all other general Linux code! This is the only way Linux can stay clean!
     
    Mufflore likes this.
  12. Clanger

    Clanger Master Guru

    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    117
    GPU:
    igpu
    Microsoft vs Linux? they'll feck it up just like they did with Skype and Nokia :mad:
    RIP Nokia, they aint been the same since :(
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2019
  13. Alessio1989

    Alessio1989 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,351
    Likes Received:
    224
    GPU:
    .
    No fear, Linux will remain a clusterfùck. And it could get worst if they will starting accepting drivers written in Rust.
     
  14. vbetts

    vbetts Don Vincenzo Staff Member

    Messages:
    14,615
    Likes Received:
    1,190
    GPU:
    RTX 2070FE
    Fun fact- Windows 10 can run Linux sub system, so why fight each other when they can coexist?! :D
     

Share This Page