this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
681 points (96.0% liked)

linuxmemes

20742 readers
1240 users here now

I use Arch btw

Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
poopsmith@lemmy.world
zephyr@lemmy.world
681
Windows dropped new feature called "sudo" (feddit.de)
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by Titou@feddit.de to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world
128 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 21 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

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 points 7 months ago (3 children)
  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 points 7 months ago (1 children)
  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.

[–] ricdeh@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

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

[–] ammonium@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

No, the GPLv3 changes nothing in this regard.

[–] joel_feila@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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?

[–] ricdeh@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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).

[–] joel_feila@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

thanks for the answer.

[–] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 2 points 7 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 points 7 months ago

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

Besides quite literally every piece of software breaking, sure.