Surface 2019 + Neo and Duo dual screens

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by binaryhermit

Still, given the steps MS took to try to kill Linux...
I mean, isn't it believed that they were behind the whole SCO lawsuits thing?

(Believe it or not, the SCO v IBM lawsuit's still going on last I checked, over 15 years later)

And Mary Jo Foley (quoted in posts above) was the long time "cheerleader" for SCO in that case (back when it was still relevant).

[binaryhermit]

Originally Posted by j.p.s

An android device runs a linux kernel, but that does not make it what I think of as a linux device.

And in the strictest sense, Android is Linux because it has the Linux kernel. Though historically Linux has referred to what RMS insists should be called GNU/Linux, which is the GNU userspace tools running on top of the Linux kernel.

TL;DR depending on how you define Linux, we both could be right.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by binaryhermit

My hottake: Microsoft is releasing a Linux device.
Convicted monopolist Microsoft from the 1990s is dead.

You are a little behind the times. Microsoft has been pushing Linux for a while now.

It is a platinum member of the Linux Foundation: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/1...atinum_member/
It has provided most of its patents to the Open Innovation Network: https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/10/...-to-help-linux
It is including a full Linux kernel in Windows 10 to enhance/replace the existing Linux subsystem: https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/6/18...kernel-feature

A big reason is that Microsoft is as much (or more) about Azure as they are about Windows, and Linux on Azure is big business for them, with more machines running Linux than Windows.

[leebase]

Android is not linux in any meaningful way relating to computer market share. It doesn't run linux software. Android (for now) is built on top of the linux kernel.

If you "know linux" you don't "know Android".

If you "know Android" you do not necessarily "know Linux".

[binaryhermit]

Well, technically it is running Linux, as you said, at least for now
But yes, it's not running what people think of as Linux, which is what RMS would insist that you call GNU/Linux.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by leebase

Android is not linux in any meaningful way...

Originally Posted by binaryhermit

Well, technically it is running Linux, as you said, at least for now...

Linux is the kernel but Android is not a Gnu/Linux distribution. Still, Android is based on Linux, not Windows or UNIX. The Linux kernel is everywhere. It makes you wonder how expensive devices like routers and eReaders (as two examples) would have been if there wasn't Linux/Android and developers had to pay a license fee to Microsoft (or someone else) for the embedded OS.

[leebase]

Originally Posted by rcentros

Linux is the kernel but Android is not a Gnu/Linux distribution. Still, Android is based on Linux, not Windows or UNIX. The Linux kernel is everywhere. It makes you wonder how expensive devices like routers and eReaders (as two examples) would have been if there wasn't Linux/Android and developers had to pay a license fee to Microsoft (or someone else) for the embedded OS.

The power of open source....for sure.

The Mac is built on top of BSD...another open effort...and an actual version of Unix (which Linux is not....close...but not).

However, saying the Mac is BSD is like saying Android is linux. There is a kernel of truth (see what I did there?)....but not really.

Linux won on the server....but not by killing Windows. Windows is doing great on servers too. What Linux did was replace all the different proprietary flavors of Unix....with 1000 different flavors of linux

Linux on the Desktop -- happened...but never threatened Windows and never will.

Linux in IoT is big too....little devices. Will be interesting if Windows Core will take back any of that business.

iOS is based on BSD just like the Mac is. But iOS is no more "the Mac" than it is BSD. iOS (in all of it's flavors) is it's "own thing".

What a fun type to be a tech fan.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by leebase

Linux won on the server....but not by killing Windows. Windows is doing great on servers too.

Well, kind of, I guess. But Linux servers also chewed up the Microsoft server market share. Even Microsoft's Azure (Cloud service) is over 50% Linux based now.

[leebase]

Originally Posted by rcentros

Well, kind of, I guess. But Linux servers also chewed up the Microsoft server market share. Even Microsoft's Azure (Cloud service) is over 50% Linux based now.

I am not so sure. Windows took out Netware for corporate networking and for hosting application servers. Linux took over everything that Unix had.

Then there were things that came after....the internet (now relabeled "the cloud") and supercomputers. Linux is doing awesomely well in both areas. But Windows never HAD that market so it's hard to say Linux "took the market from Windows".

And while linux is "free" -- it's not really cost free for enterprises and large cloud companies. They'd have been likely to be running some flavor of Unix over windows. It's not just about cost as to why most of the web runs on linux over windows. Windows is just so heavy with the GUI and all the windows services and can't be scaled back (that's going to change) they way linux (and Unix) can.

Frankly, it's a real wonder how Windows has maintained it's relevance in the face of "free" Linux. One would think "Linux must not be all that" in the face of Windows still existing....you know....since it's free and does everything Windows does and has been around more than 20 years now.

Now...mind you...I know that Linux is great. But I'm just putting into perspective the "victory" when one is giving away the product.

Kind of like Android vs iOS. It's not surprising that Android is 85% of the market. It's surprising that Android isn't all of the market by now. Apple's 15% is an amazing feat in light of selling something at premium prices against much cheaper.

[binaryhermit]

Anyway, I was kinda being a jerk.
Also, this may be bad timing, but I'd like to point out that Mac OS is actually technically considered to be Unix, as it's one of the few OSes whose maker bothered to go through the process of getting it certified as fully compliant with the Unix specification.
So Unix isn't completely irrelevant.

EDIT: And to be fair, the iPhone's market share is probably half it being percieved as "cool" and half being percieved as Just Working(tm).
Although the issues with iOS 13 so far make that second part appear to be fake news.

[leebase]

A billion active iOS devices...makes it hard to minimize with “people think it’s cool”. It’s great that there is competition. Kind of sad that there are only two platforms given the 2.5 -3 billion mobile phones in use.

I just ordered my > $1,000 iPhone 11 Pro. I consider it a camera purchase. I also just received in the mail my $55 Linux computer (Rasberry Pi 4 with 4gig ram).

I love all kinds of gadgets and use all the major OS platforms

[binaryhermit]

Also, regarding the Surface Duo, it's been done before, just not well.
https://www.cnet.com/reviews/kyocera...sprint-review/

https://www.cnet.com/reviews/zte-axon-m-review/

https://www.cnet.com/reviews/sony-tablet-p-review/

EDIT: Also forgot about the Nintendo DS line, though that's a completely different use case.

[Kindleing]

Originally Posted by leebase

However, saying the Mac is BSD is like saying Android is linux. There is a kernel of truth (see what I did there?)....but not really.

There's more than a kernel of truth there - I can open Terminal on my Mac and run most Unix-type commands with no problem. Typing "man [whatever]", where "whatever" is a standard Unix utility usually brings up the man pages - even vi (in the form of vim) is there if you want it. Once you drop out of the GUI and go to the command line most Unix/Linux users should be able to navigate around OS X without too much problem. Some of the standard BSD features may have been dropped from the newest version but my understanding is they can be added back.

Wally

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by leebase

I am not so sure. Windows took out Netware for corporate networking and for hosting application servers. Linux took over everything that Unix had.

Netware was basically dead in the late 90s. Windows Server dominated until about 2010... and then Linux started taking over.

Microsoft developer reveals Linux is now more used on Azure than Windows Server

Linux rules all the clouds now, including Microsoft's own Azure.

Three and a half years ago, Mark Russinovich, Azure CTO, Microsoft's cloud, said, "One in four [Azure] instances are Linux." Next, in 2017, Microsoft revealed that 40% of Azure virtual machines (VM) were Linux-based. Then in the fall of 2018, Scott Guthrie, Microsoft's executive VP of the cloud and enterprise group, told me in an exclusive interview, "About half Azure VMs are Linux". Now, Sasha Levin, Microsoft Linux kernel developer, in a request that Microsoft be allowed to join a Linux security list, revealed that "the Linux usage on our cloud has surpassed Windows".

Shocking you say? Not really.

Linux is largely what runs enterprise computing both on in-house servers and on the cloud. Windows Server has been declining for years. In the most recent IDC Worldwide Operating Systems and Subsystems Market Shares report covering 2017, Linux had 68% of the market. Its share has only increased since then.

It was only a matter of time for Linux to dominate even on Azure. As Guthrie said in September, "Every month, Linux goes up."
...

Why is everyone, including Microsoft, switching to Linux and open-source software? Guthrie explained: "It started more than 10 years ago when we open-sourced ASP.NET. We recognized open source is something that every developer can benefit from. It's not nice, it's essential. It's not just code, it's community." Indeed, Guthrie then claimed, "We're now the largest open-source project supporter in the world."

Even former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, who infamously said, "Linux is a cancer," now says he loves Linux.

There are now at least eight Linux distros available on Azure. And that's not counting Microsoft's own Azure Sphere. This is a software and hardware stack designed to secure edge devices, which includes what Microsoft president Brad Smith declared "a custom Linux kernel".

It's now a Linux world -- even at Microsoft headquarters in Redmond, Washington.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/micros...indows-server/

[fjtorres]

It's all about the money, not the plumbing.

When Linux was hyped as desktop-viable, MS cold shouldered it.
Once it became clear it would never happen and MS figured out how to make money off Linux...suddenly Linux was fine. After all, MS has *always* made money off XENIX, POSIX, and UNIX. MAC, ATARI, COMMODORE, too.

The MS game is "what's mine is mine, what's yours is negotiable".
Linux on Azure?
Beats Linux on AWS.

Same thing with the 150+ android apps from MS.
MS is the biggest developer on Android, by far. They can afford to make their apps cross-platform and tie them to Windows and Azure. The plan is simple: android and iOS become feeders for the productivity platforms. Same reason Surface exists, to keep Windows in control of the productivity market. When the desktop was key, they protected the desktop. When networks and servers were key, they fight for that.
Now that the cloud is the key, they'll fight there.
MS is big enough and diversified enough they can juggle and support all those segments and neglect none. Not everybody can make that claim.

XBOX, Surface, Windows, Exchange, Sharepoint, even Office, they're all feeders. Bait to keep Azure on top (along with AWS) well ahead of IBM, GOOGLE, ORACLE, etc. 15 feeders and counting. They all make big money but they're all secondary by now.

As far as MS is concerned, the Duo running Android is as significant as it running a TCP/IP stack. What matters is it driving users to Office, not Google; XBOX LIVE, not Playstation Network; Azure, not AWS. It's all about the subscriptions. (The same as Kindle existing to drive customers to KDP, KDP SELECT, KU, and Prime. Kindle dominates ebooks because of the store and subscriptions, not the eReader. Wasn't always the case, but it is now. The feeder is less important than the backend.)

BTW, Strictly speaking internet =/= cloud.
Internet is about communications, plumbing, whereas the Cloud is about computing services, virtual mainframes. The money in the cloud is in the subscription for the underpinnings and services that host the virtual machines. And the rainmaker virtual machines don't care what runs in them. It can be old-school software on Linux or Windows, it can be "AI" apps dependent on the proprietary extensions, or it could be Quantums apps (next decade) but the days when Linux vs Windows mattered (moneywise) are fading. Both are legacies by now. The computing world is moving on.

For now both IBM and Google are also rans in the Cloud.
Both are well advanced in Quantum Computing, though. MS and Amazon need to worry because that's where the the world is moving, both communication and computing-wise.

That is what Nadella and Bezos worry about.
Preparing for the next fight.

It's a Red Queen race.