Yeah, I know how it sounds, however I think it makes sense, especially after Microsoft’s patent release. So, we all know the direction that Microsoft is going in - they don’t want Windows, it’s a burden to them, especially that they won’t be making as much money off of it since Windows 10 is the last Windows. The development of an operating system must be incredibly expensive. We can see that they want to outsource a lot of their work after testing layoffs - in this case, to the users. By releasing their patents, and making software open source, they can further decrease their development cost. Let’s say that after the patent release, people will create better compatibility between Linux and Windows - then Microsoft could jump into Linux with minimal effort. They could then provide services for the enterprise based on their Linux distro, similar to RHEL. This actually could be profitable, since they wouldn’t have to do much in terms of actual development. Microsoft’s primary revenue sources are Office and Cloud. Offering those services together with Linux, plus enterprise services could increase their revenue with those - without much development being done. I’m not saying that Windows will be replaced by Linux for Microsoft - but a very slow and gradual shift makes sense, even though it might sound crazy at first. What do you think?
Question is: Is it?
And if it is, does it have to be?
Nobody needs all the features apart from the PR department. There is a reason why Server uses much less RAM than Windows (server2016 vs win10).
Feature creep is a real problem in software. There is no up front cost to more features, no parts that need to be purchased or machines to be upgraded/replaced.
You see the same with movies and video games. They want to include everything and thereby drive cost up higher and higher.
I can see why Microsoft would run their own Linux distro. They could add or remove modules as they see fit, customize it so the transition from Win10 is more or less seamless (in the microsoft definition, so half the stuff breaks).
From the financial perspective, it makes complete sense. Outsource all the things!
They are still releasing new Windows server version and Windows LTSB versions. The pricing has been going UP for enterprise and subscription versions, not down, and the market for computers is growing(not as fast as say 10 years ago, but definitely not shrinking). So they are still making good money from business users, and it is not that much more money to make a version for home users, which do free beta testing as mentioned, and some spend money on the store.
With 88% market share I don’t think so.
They want all commercial customers on a subscription plan for Office 365 and Windows 10. The cost of Windows will probably be hidden in the Office subscription cost.
I see them doing this at my own work place. The license cost for on premise licensing creeps ever higher. The 3rd party vendors all build for Office 365 and cloud installs now not on premise.
Recently had to do a SharePoint upgrade to 2016 (I hate SharePoint) and the business wanted a 3rd party product for SharePoint for the intranet side of things. Supposed to be easier, prettier etc.
The third party vendors “technical lead” didn’t know how to use IIS because almost all of their customers are in Office 365 and all that boring web server business is handled my MS!
In time they will want this for the home user as well.
I could see them building their own Linux distro for Azure but that would be it.
Could you develop? Because I know we (I mean the compagny of my parents) are considering switching from OneDrive to SharePoint to sync all the compagny files between the PC (1 desktop 2 laptops always on the go)
My dad has to work with sharepoint, according to his rants, it is the worst thing ever. Even SAP is less of an annoyance than Sharepoint.
Sharepoint was designed by a sadist.
I concur. I could go on and on about specific pain points but the core reason is this.
It tries to do to much. It is like wrestling a giant half-dead octopus.
My co-workers and I have all said that we won’t include our knowledge of it on our CVs / Resumes so we don’t get lumbered looking after it at any future company.
I am not a SharePoint developer.
If you are only using it for document storage & collaboration with three people it will probably be okay but many alternatives exist.
Personally I host my own Nextcloud server which might (or might not) be a suitable product for your needs.
As a corporation, Microsoft is obligated to consider ways to maximize revenue and profit. If that ever means moving away from Windows, I’m sure that will happen.
But, we’re a long way from there.
Windows 10 may be “free” to consumers running specific older versions of Windows but hardware vendors continue to pay MS for every copy of Windows 10 they preinstall on their consumer products. I’d bet that Microsoft determined that revenue generated leveraging user data collected via Win10 would exceed retail sales of Win10 install media to consumers. I’d also bet they were correct.
Windows 10, obviously, is not free to enterprise users.
Microsoft is dragging around a lot of legacy code and compatibility issues with Windows. All of that increases the odds for undiscovered bugs showing up after updates are released, and complicates the update process itself.
Microsoft could develop and market a new OS that abandons much of the legacy bits and optimizes for newer hardware, while continuing to market, maintain, and develop for Win10 and subsequent versions. If that happens, it will be driven by business reasons.
In the end, it’s hardware that sets the boundaries of software capabilities. As long as the world continues to use the established PC architecture – essentially created as a platform for running Windows – Windows will be around.
I did wonder if Windows S was going to be a step in that direction for the desktop. Server Core and Nano Server certainly are. I’m not sure they will catch on though, Linux has mostly cornered the market for lightweight and reliable server OS.
That said, I am truly impressed by server core, it’s been great for many reasons; getting calls from confused developers saying they didn’t ask for a Linux server is one of them 
Didn’t they sort of try this with the cut down windows that only runs App Store programs? I guess that would be their dream going forward… But everyone hates the idea!
They still push pretty hard for corporate and government use of Windows, that’s a good cash cow. Regular consumers want shit for free, or they’ll just steal it. So might as well monetise the mongrels.
Oh @BGL beat me to it. ah well.
I think Microsoft bet wrong on the all those “Modern” apps, or whatever we’re supposed to call them. Wasn’t the genesis of all that tied in with dreams of a Windows Phone empire and the compulsory tablet-ness of Windows 8? Windows Phone is dead, Windows 8 is dead, and we’re all happy using the equivalent of Modern apps from Google and Apple on our phones.
That was Take1, Take2 was Windows S which was x86 but with Windows apps only available from the store, good in many respects for a more secure (or controlled) system but crap when you consider that few windows users expect that, and the catalogue was woeful. MS have now killed Windows S (s mode still exists I think) but means users will still expect to install old apps they purchased X years ago.
I don’t see Microsoft abandoning their current kernel for Linux. Windows 10 uses some sort of hybrid NT kernel, which I guess functions in a similar manor to the way that Android piggybacks off of the Linux Kernel, but at the same time isn’t Linux. Microsoft put so much R&D into their current system, that I do not feel like they will throw it all away.
However, they could try and make the Windows much more transparent by allowing Linux users to install Windows components through Microsoft maintained PPA’s. I could see Microsoft offering software packages at a price for Linux users. It has always been Microsoft’s mantra to “profit of your competitors instead of compete with them”.
Microsoft dropping a lot of their products into open source is interesting. It is a bit hard to guess what their overall plans are.
I believe Microsoft uses a numbering scheme for the kernel, with “NT” being more or less public branding. It’s been around since, at least, the development of the Windows NT product.
I wonder if MS is really interested any longer is pushing retail software sales. The price of “apps” sold via app stores is so low you need to sell a certain threshold volume to make money. It seems pretty clear its foray into phones never got to that point. You’d need to ask Microsoft if the Win 10 app store is profitable.
WSL, the Github buy, etc., target developers, not desktop users. I’m not sure if, or why, MS would want to target desktop Linux users. Where’s the money in that? They could move in that direction by adding X and/or Wayland to WSL and putting a point-and-click wrapper around the thing.
Microsoft could also do something like buy CodeWeaver and Proton/DXVK, roll the tech into Windows directly or as an open source add-on. I.e., enable relatively seamless use of Windows executables, including games, on Linux for free with the revenue coming from retail subscriptions and sales.
This is definitely true. Because they already won the desktop war, but all the devs flocked to OSX with linux servers.
I think our ‘type’ do like to go against the tide of the ‘normies’.
Seeing as how Microsoft wants to diversify their revenue they need to compete by having available offerings, similar to that of Digital Ocean, or Heroku, or AWS. They’ve had a lot of failure breaking into other markets, so the dev space is really their last ditch effort I think.
I doubt MS is going after devs simply to increase revenue from devs. They need, first, to stop devs who want to use Linux tools from walking away from Windows completely, and, second, to encourage creation of products that do increase revenue by attracting users to the cloud-based future they see for all of us.
I think MS, as well, expects/hopes that future to be as OS-agnostic as possible. But, they won’t make noise about it and they will hedge their bets.
They’re going after devs because those are the people who decide what tools they want to use and host their creations on.
In 5-8 years windows will be linux. Thats just going to happen and they really won’t have a choice in the matter. There won’t be enough users that will want to use NT based windows in a few years with how outdated its tech is. It just can’t get managed correctly anymore. And really, no matter what anyone says, the driver system isn’t great, the kernel security is garbage, its just not a good system and that is becoming apparent to the devs wery quickly.
As for the patent release, its all a bunch of useless tech. A bunch of code from vista, 7, and 8 that was just random crap. Its the same blob that they tried to be impressive with a few years ago.
Anyways. Windows will be linux in due time. But, linux as it is is a perfect system in use. Relatively. If you know how to read you can use it, and ubuntu as it is, systewd and all, is a solid design no matter who you are.