I don’t think i need to explain how it works, should i ?

  • 👍Maximum Derek👍@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    801·
    10 months ago

    This has put me in mind of when OSX added virtual desktops. Everyone forgot that they’ve been a thing in *nix for 30 years, and NextOS (which OSX was built on top of) already had them. So Apple purposefully removed them, let people complain about not having them (and build their own 3rd party solutions) for something like 8 years, then got mountains of positive press for the “new innovation” of virtual desktops. Isn’t Apple amazing!

    Great job Microsoft! I’m sure this is a game changer for the world.

  • Yer Ma@lemm.ee
    69·
    10 months ago

    Are they actually naming the command “sudo” or is that just a comparison?

    Edit: apparently yes, the audacity lol

  • const_void@lemmy.ml
    51·
    10 months ago

    Don’t forget all the UI/UX they’ve been copying from KDE. Working at Microsoft must be such an easy job when the open source community does all your work for you.

    • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      172·
      10 months ago

      A problem I have with the GPL is it allows corporations and shareholders to use software for free. I would be interested in licensing software I make for commercial use by sole proprietors and other small businesses for free, but charge truly offensive prices to entities that have “investors.” Like, Bob’s wood shop, where Bob, his son Rob, and Rob’s friend from high school Jimmy make butcher block counter tops? They can use my software for free. Microsoft? $600 trillion per seat per minute.

      • eatham 🇭🇲@aussie.zoneEnglish
        4·
        10 months ago

        How exactly do you want it? Publicly traded companiee can’t use it? That would affect small companies too, but being publicly tradable is more likely to make an evil company in the end. Companies over a certain valuation? That would have problems with interest and private companies like valve not having to tell people their valuation. Mix of both is probably best.

        • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          8·
          10 months ago

          I would probably list out a series of symptoms of large businesses that don’t qualify for my non-corporate license.

          • The company itself, its owners, executives, board members, employees or any other persons associated with the company has spent more than $100 on lobbying since the invention of the written word. To include a middle manager that worked for the company for 2 weeks, quit, and then later went on to become involved in lobbying.
          • Any executive, board member, manager or such person currently or has ever had a contract that features any clauses that could be described as a “golden parachute.”
          • The company has ever engaged in anti-union activity.
          • The company has ever outsourced jobs overseas because labor in developing countries is cheaper. Hiring outside one’s home country seeking better expertise ie “We contracted with a German machine shop because the sample work they turned in was of better quality” is okay; “We only have to pay Vietnamese teenagers 40 cents a day” isn’t.
          • The company publicly trades stock. That is to say random people mostly stock brokers and banks that don’t actually generate any value for society pays a little money and then expects dividents in perpetuity like ticks getting fat and bloated with the blood of higher life forms. These people may not financially benefit from my work more than I do.
          • The highest paid person who is in any way on the payroll of the company is paid more than 20 times the lowest paid employee.

          That’s probably a good start.

          • eatham 🇭🇲@aussie.zoneEnglish
            5·
            10 months ago

            That’s a pretty good list. I would say for 1 and 4 it should be in the past 50 years, to allow for companies to change. I would also add that anything the parent company or a company owned by the parent company that violates these rules also counts. Also, what is a “golden parachute”

            • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              4·
              10 months ago

              A “golden parachute” is basically a clause in the contract of a CEO or other higher up where the company agrees to pay severance benefits. I don’t have a problem with severance pay in general but some of these things are basically "No matter how much I embezzle and defraud, no matter how many people I kill, no matter how much damage I do, I get tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, to the degree of actually incentivizing getting hired and fired as much as possible.

    • Mio@feddit.nu
      3·
      10 months ago

      Not so easy. Look at how often they have to redo the startmenu.

    • MajorHavoc@programming.dev
      221·
      10 months ago

      Seriously. Yes.

      If Microsoft doesn’t have a secret internal build of Windows that runs on a Linux Kernel, they’re out of their minds.

      The Windows Kernel, as cool as it is, is 100% a cost center. If Microsoft switches (seemlessly) to a Linux kernel, no one would really notice. So at some point they should really switch it.

      • duck1e@lemmy.ml
        20·
        10 months ago
        1. they’ll have to opensource the code if they use linux kernel
        2. even with linux being vastly superior, it nice we have 3 major kernels with widely different approaches. it would be sad if either of these 3 dies out
        • _cnt0@sh.itjust.works
          14·
          10 months ago
          1. they’ll have to opensource the code if they use linux kernel

          Only changes they would make to the kernel. There is no obligation to make an OS utilizing the linux kernel open source.

          • Richard@lemmy.worldEnglish
            32·
            10 months ago

            An oversight by the developers. Had they licensed it under the GNU GPL v3, such a thing would not be possible.

        • joel_feila@lemmy.world
          3·
          10 months ago

          Legal question. If Windows on the linux kernal needs to open source, but that does not apply to other software it runs, right? So could they close source their DE and charge for that, or charge for the windows store?

          • Richard@lemmy.worldEnglish
            91·
            10 months ago

            That is correct. Microsoft could simply charge for their closed-source desktop environment or their package manager or their software environment in general, but any modifications to the kernel would need to be free and open-source (though they could still charge money for it).

        • MajorHavoc@programming.dev
          2·
          10 months ago

          even with linux being vastly superior, it nice we have 3 major kernels with widely different approaches. it would be sad if either of these 3 dies out

          Agreed. I do think at least a couple versions of the Windows NT kernel are going to live on forever in emulation, thanks to some pretty awesome games that require it.

      • droans@lemmy.world
        2·
        10 months ago

        If Microsoft switches (seemlessly) to a Linux kernel, no one would really notice.

        Besides quite literally every piece of software breaking, sure.

  • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
    241·
    10 months ago

    People are laughing, but it is annoying to open a Windows terminal, get a couple of steps into whatever you were doing, and find you need admin privileges for some bullshit.

    Pressing up, home, "sudo " and enter is a lot quicker than opening a new command prompt in admin mode.

  • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipEnglish
    161·
    10 months ago

    I can’t wait for their version to be totally broken compared to normal sudo on windows

      • m_f@midwest.social
        5·
        10 months ago

        What parent is likely referencing

        TBH I wonder if the current Microsoft is capable of executing that here. I don’t believe in a “changed” MS, but Linux is eating the world, and MS doesn’t really care about Windows much anymore. Azure happily runs Linux VMs

        • 0x4E4F@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          2·
          10 months ago

          They can still take a stab at it 🤷. Why else would you actually add something like this… it makes no sense to me.

          • Transient Punk@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            8·
            10 months ago

            Maybe they’re slowly working toward making Windows work on the Linux kernel in order to offload maintenance costs to the open source community… 👽🛸

  • sbv@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    14·
    10 months ago

    I’ll take it.

    Do they finally have an ls in the default path, or do I still need to alias that?