• katy ✨
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why wouldn’t they? Windows 10+ is a great development machine and Microsoft knows that a lot of developers develop with Linux. WSL is great for all parties - including Linux

    • sudo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      1 year ago

      I, too, have had the audacity to say WSL is useful on this community and it was also met with down votes. Purists hating and gate keeping, and then they wonder why Linux isn’t more popular.

      • jj4211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        WSL may be fine for a Windows user to get some access to Linux, however for me it misses the vast majority of what I value in a desktop distribution -Better Window managers. This is subjective, but with Windows you are stuck with Microsoft implementation, and if you might like a tiling window manager, or Plasma workspaces better, well you need to run something other than Windows or OSX.

        -Better networking. I can do all kinds of stuff with networking. Niche relative to most folks, but the Windows networking stack is awfully inflexible and frustrating after doing a lot of complex networking tasks in Linux

        -More understanding and control over the “background” pieces. With Windows doing nothing a lot is happening and it’s not really clear what is happening where. With Linux, it can be daunting like Windows, but the pieces can be inspected more easily and things are more obvious.

        -Easier “repair”. If Windows can’t fix itself, then it’s really hard to recover from a lot of scenarios. Generally speaking a Linux system has to be pretty far gone

        -Easier license wrangling. Am I allowed to run another copy of Windows? Can I run a VM of it or does it have to be baremetal? Is it tied to the system I bought with it preloaded, or is it bound to my microsoft account? With most Linux distributions, this is a lot easier, the answer is “sure you can run it”.

        -Better package management. If I use flatpak, dnf, apt, zypper, or snap, I can pretty much find any software I want to run and by virtue of installing in that way, it also gets updated. Microsoft has added winget, which is a step in the right direction, but the default ‘update’ flow for a lazy user still ignores all winget content, and many applications ignore all that and push their own self-updater, which is maddening.

        The biggest concern, like this thread has, is that WSL sets the tone for “ok, you have enough Linux to do what you need from the comfort of the ‘obviously’ better Microsoft ecosystem” and causes people to not consider actually trying it for real.

        • voxel@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          well about networking: windows proxy settings just work transparently, while on linux it’s just a config option that applications may or may not respect (vpn still works perfectly, but not proxy)

          • jj4211@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            True, though I’m mostly invested in the kernel networking behaviors, rather than having a nicely standardized place for proxy settings so that applications have a logical place to go.

            It’s a fair criticism that in userspace, proxy settings have been not standardized and also TLS certificates are similarly a bit messy.

          • jj4211@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Of course the problem is that wingetui isn’t there by default, isn’t integrated to Windows Update, no matter what, WinGetUI basically becomes yet another tray icon, alongside a half dozen other auto-updater tray icons that various vendors added since there’s no integrated facility to rely upon.

            So sure, it’s a bandaid on winget, but it’s still awkward and the ecosystem is a mess. Compared to Linux where a distribution will have, in the box, an extensible central update facility maybe serving two different types of repositories (e.g. apt and snap, or dnf and flatpak).

      • halva@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m by no means a purest but I’ve found WSL… More annoying than using Linux as is. Network oddities, random programs not functioning and just generally subpar as is.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yea anyone who says wsl is good is a windows user and shouldn’t try to administer Linux systems.

      If you are going to use Linux on windows just use virtualbox

    • ulkesh@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Windows 10+ is a great development machine

      If doing Windows development, I agree. WSL is a nice “I would like to have a Linux-like environment without losing Windows or running a full-blown VM” measure. This idea has existed for a long time with things like Cygwin, but at the end of the day, a natively-ran Linux distro will be considerably better for many development stacks than WSL.