Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals
-
I'd rather learn what's already there instead of learn potentially bad and work harder to relearn the right way in Linux distros.
There is the way to do it in Windows and then there is the Right way to do it in Linux.
-
It makes me wonder how far Microsoft are willing to go down the route of creating their own distribution, would be very beneficial and save costs if they didn't have to manage their own kernel anymore. I'm sure they could make their distribution compatible with windows applications as well.
-
@StuartJordan But by rewriting all of their software packages, you would be looking at rewriting at least a decade's worth of code across all of Microsoft's platforms. Unless they walk in today and say "This is the day that we no longer write for our own kernel. Everything from here on out will be written for Linux.", it will never happen. I think it would be a great idea for them to write their own Linux distro, but don't think its ever going to happen.
-
@StuartJordan said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
It makes me wonder how far Microsoft are willing to go down the route of creating their own distribution, would be very beneficial and save costs if they didn't have to manage their own kernel anymore. I'm sure they could make their distribution compatible with windows applications as well.
Easily. Or "kinda easily". With all of their documentation and code, they could do it without "too" much effort. They have already done it in reverse several times.
-
@NerdyDad said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
@StuartJordan But by rewriting all of their software packages...
Why would they do that? All they need is a Windows API on top of Linux, the same way they do with a Linux API on top of Windows already. This is stuff that they do every day and are very good at. Reversing it is no harder than doing it the way that they do it now.
-
@NerdyDad said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
Unless they walk in today and say "This is the day that we no longer write for our own kernel. Everything from here on out will be written for Linux.", it will never happen. I think it would be a great idea for them to write their own Linux distro, but don't think its ever going to happen.
It doesn't require that kind of work at all.
And remember, for most of the history of Microsoft, they were a leading (and for a few years the leading) UNIX vendor. Microsoft has spent more time working on UNIX (and Linux) than it has on their current Windows family.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
I wonder how much value people are going to see in this? Is the goal just to make Linux seem easier for Windows admins who have a pre-known set of tools and they want to keep the same commands across both systems? Because most everything that Sysinternals does was really to make Windows catch up with what we already had on Linux. Not sure that there is something missing like on Windows to make this really valuable.
It looks like it's aimed towards Windows developers working on Linux, basically touching on what you said.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
@NerdyDad said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
@StuartJordan But by rewriting all of their software packages...
Why would they do that? All they need is a Windows API on top of Linux, the same way they do with a Linux API on top of Windows already. This is stuff that they do every day and are very good at. Reversing it is no harder than doing it the way that they do it now.
True, I think it would be a good move for them, I don't think they see Windows as their main bread a butter anymore, they have even reduced the windows team. Their main focus seems to be Azure these days.
-
@StuartJordan said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
@NerdyDad said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
@StuartJordan But by rewriting all of their software packages...
Why would they do that? All they need is a Windows API on top of Linux, the same way they do with a Linux API on top of Windows already. This is stuff that they do every day and are very good at. Reversing it is no harder than doing it the way that they do it now.
True, I think it would be a good move for them, I don't think they see Windows as their main bread a butter anymore, they have even reduced the windows team. Their main focus seems to be Azure these days.
Moving to a unified kernel would add some risk that the "entire" world moved to just one kernel. There are reasons that we, as consumers, don't want that. From a Microsoft perspective, the cost savings would be enormous. It's amazing that they pay to build their own kernels when there is so little value in the kernel for the past couple of decades.
And they still don't run, and never once have, a kernel that they made themselves. The one that they use now is taken from OS/2 and was jointed developed with IBM in the 1980s.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
@StuartJordan said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
@NerdyDad said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
@StuartJordan But by rewriting all of their software packages...
Why would they do that? All they need is a Windows API on top of Linux, the same way they do with a Linux API on top of Windows already. This is stuff that they do every day and are very good at. Reversing it is no harder than doing it the way that they do it now.
True, I think it would be a good move for them, I don't think they see Windows as their main bread a butter anymore, they have even reduced the windows team. Their main focus seems to be Azure these days.
Moving to a unified kernel would add some risk that the "entire" world moved to just one kernel. There are reasons that we, as consumers, don't want that. From a Microsoft perspective, the cost savings would be enormous. It's amazing that they pay to build their own kernels when there is so little value in the kernel for the past couple of decades.
And they still don't run, and never once have, a kernel that they made themselves. The one that they use now is taken from OS/2 and was jointed developed with IBM in the 1980s.
I wonder how much of that original code is still in the Kernel?
I have to agree that Linux would have a bigger attack area if everyone moved over to using it. We would probably see some unsavoury malware and Viruses created, it would still probably be less than windows though because you need to elevate privileges on Linux and we all know most people run with admin privileges on windows. -
@StuartJordan said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
...it would still probably be less than windows though because you need to elevate privileges on Linux and we all know most people run with admin privileges on windows.
That's not related to Linux vs. NTKernel (the Windows Kernel.) They are essentially identical there. You are seeing "common approaches from the userbase" and perceiving that behaviour as being caused by the kernel code, but it is not.
Run Windows uses on a Linux-based OS and they will behave the same as they always did. Put Linux-based OS users on Windows and they are secure. It's the userbase, not the product, that has that effect.
Windows is just as much "need elevated privileges to run" as any highly secure Linux distro, but Windows end users are way more likely to work around that, and be accepting of third party products that demand it.
Port the Windows desktop to Linux, literally nothing will change, because those users will come along with it.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
@StuartJordan said in Microsoft to Launch Linux Version of Sysinternals:
...it would still probably be less than windows though because you need to elevate privileges on Linux and we all know most people run with admin privileges on windows.
That's not related to Linux vs. NTKernel (the Windows Kernel.) They are essentially identical there. You are seeing "common approaches from the userbase" and perceiving that behaviour as being caused by the kernel code, but it is not.
Run Windows uses on a Linux-based OS and they will behave the same as they always did. Put Linux-based OS users on Windows and they are secure. It's the userbase, not the product, that has that effect.
Windows is just as much "need elevated privileges to run" as any highly secure Linux distro, but Windows end users are way more likely to work around that, and be accepting of third party products that demand it.
Port the Windows desktop to Linux, literally nothing will change, because those users will come along with it.
I suppose I was meaning the userbase more then the actual kernel in that statement.
