You've misunderstood what this is. It is a full kernel for the Linux subsystem, which provides the ability to run Linux code in Windows. As I understand it, the existing solution maps Linux kernel calls to the Windows kernel. I can imagine it would be much easier to just provide a true Linux kernel rather than try to support a brittle mapping layer.
They are not putting in a Linux kernel for Windows. Huge difference.
I have a decent understanding of what this is. I don't think WSL was added because they thought it would be cool to have two OS's. The bigger picture is every day windows becomes less relevant. Microsoft is now a powerful cloud company. I'm not sure even they even care about windows clients beyond legacy contracts. I think before thier users have no choice but to leave they want to say hey look, you are already using Linux, no need to go anywhere.
This is functionally speaking exactly what WINE has been for Linux, although WINE differs and was a lot harder to develop because for obvious reasons it cannot contain a Windows kernel.
My only concern is one day people (Microsoft?) will start writing "Linux" software which would "perform better" on WSL rather than on regular Linux, then driving away part of the userbase from the real thing.
I don't think anyone cares anymore - microsoft's future revenue is subscription based/monthly recurring services like office365, azure VMs, etc. Whether people access those from a desktop, laptop or android, ios device running windows 10 or a linux kernel or ios kernel or macos is moot.
Node and Python already run on windows natively... Docker for Windows is, meh, but it works. Still switching from a hackintosh at home to Linux... wish I could switch at work.
No one would have guessed a few years back that Apple would be running on risc chips, then Unix, then x86, then... Or Amazon becoming the leading internet infrastructure provider. Or MS dumping their browser for Chrome, or ten other very surprising things they’ve done lately.
Don’t underestimate what new leadership who have no nostalgia towards Windows, but want to save money to pay themselves bonuses might do.
Interestingly, I have it on good authority from someone who works at MS that they are experimenting exactly with that: Windows as a desktop environment running on top of Linux.
Reminds me of the time there was a comment wondering what the OS on Microsoft watch was- someone responded with a speculation - an erlang vm with js for gui
Why? With the NT now you can run Windows binaries AND Linux binaries. With the Linux kernel you can only run Linux binaries (no WINE does not count). How is that an improvement?
WINE is to Linux as WSL is to Windows... they're the same thing.
In any case, the WSL experience on windows is still pretty sub-par. Until you can at least support the functionality offered by PodMan directly, including SystemD etc, it's not there yet. Even then, it's been kind of nasty to work with in general the handful of times I've tried.
Currently using Docker for Windows, and the msys bash that comes with Git, which though annoying for some things is still better experience wise than WSL is. Next desktop (Zen 2) will be on Linux.
NT can not run Linux binaries. That is why Microsoft are now shipping a full Linux kernel for WSL 2. WSL 1 translated Linux syscalls to NT in the same way that WINE does in the reverse.
> Microsoft’s integration of Linux in Windows 10 will interface with a userspace installed via the Windows Store...
Given Microsoft's history, I can't help but wonder if this wholehearted embrace of Linux is part of a classic Microsoft embrace-extend-extinguish strategy.[a]
Is the endgame a Windows-only userspace layered on top of the Linux kernel?
They can embrace Linux, but they can't extend it in any meaningful way. By which I mean they can't ever create a Microsoft brand of packaged Linux. The Linux marketshare is already flooded with distros, and any software that earns revenue running on Linux runs on all the major distros more or less equally well. What could Microsoft create for which Microsoft Linux would be an option so compelling that companies would pay money to buy Microsoft Linux?
For example, MS could create a whole new graphical alternative to X and Wayland that works better than them both. Their challenge for capitalizing on that would be to create a software that works only somewhat well on X or Wayland, but works perfectly on MS Linux. I predict the Linux crowd will not use it. At best, they'll end up providing an alternative for the benefit of MS aficionados.
> What could Microsoft create for which Microsoft Linux would be an option so compelling that companies would pay money to buy Microsoft Linux?
Single-source licensing for enterprise-grade Linux and Windows, with a sweetheart deal. And they wouldn't have to do much, just take RHEL and offer certified builds and support. (Which is what Oracle does with their Unbreakable Linux.)
You know how expensive it is to write a Kernel? I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft will ditch their own Kernel just as they ditched their own browser engine... Why waste time and money on something that other people do equally well or better for you for free? It's just business....
If it looked like Windows,shared files with Windows, and ran Windows apps (via emulation or virtualization) that would be a huge deal in keeping companies on MS platforms, even if they're Linux underneath.
I'm feeling more like they want to inject their invasive "telemetry" into Linux too, or at least "normalise the deviance". I see their whole "we're open-source now" (mainly, open-sourcing code they can't really profit from anymore) and "friendly" face as merely trying to divert attention away from their darker side.
“Don’t care” is probably a stretch. There is still a ton of corporates who pay MS license feee for Windows. It’s still a huge part of core revenue, but future long term. revenue streams will come from services and new platforms.
I want native bash commands in Windows shell. I know powershell supports some commands, but and actual Linux shell to interface with the rest of windows will be awesome. WSL is getting there, sucks I've gotta install Python and node/npm twice.
Do you need to do something special for "wsl" to send a command to wsl? I only get an error on my win 10 machine (that "wsl" is not a known command/let).
I wish that PowerShell had a way of breaking down the learning curve. It understands some basic Bash commands like `ls` and `cd`, but I feel it would be good to use those as teachable moments, like tell me that `ls` is actually running `Get-Contents` or whatever.
I wouldn't even really say that PowerShell supports any Unix commands, they are just aliases. It breaks down pretty quick if you were to try to use any parameters.
They can still be useful, but just mostly while navigating in a command window.
it's funny how web developers are finally discovering UNIX, bash and free software now and how MS is surprised. Cmdline has always been unusable, powershell is better but people need a proper pty and Bash.
Not really. We don't have ntfs and exfat drivers in the kernel due to patent claims. Fedora can't even show fonts properly. This is just usual diplomacy. Nothing to get too happy (or too worked up) about.
I have been noticing an uptick in pro Microsoft propaganda on Hacker News. Does Microsoft seriously think developers opinions can be swayed by some lip service after almost 3 decades of abuse?
So how will the kernel run? I guess virtualised behind the scenes using Hyper-V and accessed using the Windows Terminal? Seems that this should replace the WSL project entirely which is kind of a shame because it was pretty cool.
Also, unlike others here, I'm not a fan of a computing monoculture where everything is UNIX going forward.
Readit News
They are not putting in a Linux kernel for Windows. Huge difference.
He’s not saying it’s happening right now.
Don’t underestimate what new leadership who have no nostalgia towards Windows, but want to save money to pay themselves bonuses might do.
In any case, the WSL experience on windows is still pretty sub-par. Until you can at least support the functionality offered by PodMan directly, including SystemD etc, it's not there yet. Even then, it's been kind of nasty to work with in general the handful of times I've tried.
Currently using Docker for Windows, and the msys bash that comes with Git, which though annoying for some things is still better experience wise than WSL is. Next desktop (Zen 2) will be on Linux.
...doesn't quite have the same ring.
Given Microsoft's history, I can't help but wonder if this wholehearted embrace of Linux is part of a classic Microsoft embrace-extend-extinguish strategy.[a]
Is the endgame a Windows-only userspace layered on top of the Linux kernel?
[a] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...
For example, MS could create a whole new graphical alternative to X and Wayland that works better than them both. Their challenge for capitalizing on that would be to create a software that works only somewhat well on X or Wayland, but works perfectly on MS Linux. I predict the Linux crowd will not use it. At best, they'll end up providing an alternative for the benefit of MS aficionados.
Android was an embracing of Linux, they extended it with Google Play Services, and now they're moving toward extinguishing it.
Single-source licensing for enterprise-grade Linux and Windows, with a sweetheart deal. And they wouldn't have to do much, just take RHEL and offer certified builds and support. (Which is what Oracle does with their Unbreakable Linux.)
But if you are ever curious, you can use Get-Verb[1] which will tell you what is going on.
[1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell/module/microsoft...
They can still be useful, but just mostly while navigating in a command window.
Deleted Comment
Also, unlike others here, I'm not a fan of a computing monoculture where everything is UNIX going forward.
Checkout the lightweight VMs (start around 38:00)
Those were always subpar with WSL.