This is the best timeline, isn't it folks?

btarunrThere are still limits to what you can do with Linux you get from Windows Store. For starters, the OS can't be installed on the host machine, in say, a separate partition/volume, which you can choose to boot from, using a bootloader such as GRUB

while its a move in the right direction why would any one wanting Linux accept these Restrictions imposed by microsoft

So, this runs virtualized out of the box then if it doesn't install itself as multi-boot OS ? Any info on what virtualization system it's using? Hyper-V ? Probably, considering it's on top of Windows...

They're not really operating systems you could install, but just parts of them (command line -like tools and ability to run certain command line -based applications)

dorsetknobwhile its a move in the right direction why would any one wanting Linux accept these Restrictions imposed by microsoft

Performance penalty aside, why would anyone be against running an OS in a virtualized environment? It gives the user the kind of security and flexibility that's hard to replicate. Of course you may get a different experience based on the particular implementation but I definitely wouldn't consider this a drawback. Especially since this option isn't for Linux die hards who will single boot their Linux installation, rather for people who want to use Windows as the "base" OS for whatever reason.

Rec. Sys. Req.?

The end is nigh.

KaotikThey're not really operating systems you could install, but just parts of them (command line -like tools and ability to run certain command line -based applications)

Aha, I see. Basically, Linux without the shell? Something like having only PowerShell from Windows 10.

closePerformance penalty aside, why would anyone be against running an OS in a virtualized environment? It gives the user the kind of security and flexibility that's hard to replicate. Of course you may get a different experience based on the particular implementation but I definitely wouldn't consider this a drawback. Especially since this option isn't for Linux die hards who will single boot their Linux installation, rather for people who want to use Windows as the "base" OS for whatever reason.

Exactly. A lot of my co-workers and I use virtual desktops for practically everything these days. It makes it super easy to make backups and also very portable. The performance difference is also negligible these days for most applications. I honestly don't see any drawbacks, but the upsides make it very convenient. I won't stop using visualization software (VMWare Player usually) for what Microsoft is offering here because that's not the point. But it might be interesting if I already have a Windows VM and I want to test something out with Ubuntu, then maybe I won't have to switch to a full Ubuntu VM. This might even stop a lot of people from ever trying to install a full Linux OS just to see how it works and then find they actually don't need Windows. :p

SUSE!

MS embracing the open source movement.
SQL Server runs on Linux, Mono, various integration projects.
I believe they are betting big on cloud services and they came to the conclusion that running *nix in datacenter is cheaper and more secure.

It seems people here missed the fact that WSL with Ubuntu has been available for almost a year now and are surprised, when SUSE and Fedore have been added to the list.
Only difference there is that Ubuntu will install directly from the Store, I assume, without the need to turn on dev mode, add Windows feature and so on.

This is not what you guys think, It is basically to provide a linux/Unix Terminal for Windows, just like the one you see in MacOS. This is a really nice thing.



Edit: For those who have no idea what is this. This picture sums it all up:

RejZoRSo, this runs virtualized out of the box then if it doesn't install itself as multi-boot OS ? Any info on what virtualization system it's using? Hyper-V ? Probably, considering it's on top of Windows...

It's actually not virtualized, this is a fair bit more clever. It's most similar to Wine on linux which lets you run windows applications on linux. Windows Subystem for Linux has implemented the Linux API on windows. It basically passes through the linux system calls to the appropriate windows system call.

So the Linux userspace applications from Ubuntu, Fedora & SUSE aren't running virtualized or emulated or recompiled. They're running natively. There is effectively not a performance penalty--any penalty will be from Windows doing a specific process less efficiently than Linux.

dorsetknobwhile its a move in the right direction why would any one wanting Linux accept these Restrictions imposed by microsoft

It's not really so people can run Linux but so people can use the Linux userspace tools without needing a separate system or VM.

idxThis is not what you guys think, It is basically to provide a linux/Unix Terminal for Windows, just like the one you see in MacOS. This is a really nice thing.

I was at Ignite (microsoft conference) last year. They as much as said they implemented this so that Azure developers can use a windows machine to manage the linux VMs without needing external tools like Putty.

It can be a really good solution for those who had to use something like Msys or Cygwin too (I'm one of them lol).

RejZoRAha, I see. Basically, Linux without the shell? Something like having only PowerShell from Windows 10.

Yeah, and they run within Windows 10 (via Windows Subsystem for Linux)

theeldestIt basically passes through the linux system calls to the appropriate windows system call.

I wonder how well they will be able to map it though. It's not like every Linux function is available on Windows now.

Isn't Microsoft the biggest donator to the Lunix foundation?

alucasaIsn't Microsoft the biggest donator to the Lunix foundation?

I also heard they are the single biggest contributer of Linux open source development. A lot of Microsoft employees push code into Linux to make certain features better that they themselves use for Server stuff. It makes sense that at some point they might say "this is ours".

dorsetknobwhile its a move in the right direction why would any one wanting Linux accept these Restrictions imposed by microsoft

Playing fair , i get you but before i read down to your post i was thinking.

" Great im shit at linux i could sort a virtual pc to learn it easier that way"

They do mention schools.

Just one word: fantastic.

Unlike the author suggests, it's not just for testers and developers, because (opposite to what many believe) Linux is not just for administrators and GRUB fanboys.
It's great for typical users as well - simply because many, many productivity tools work better in a shell-driven environment. As a result, many PC users that wanted to stay on Windows for practical matters, went for a dual boot (IMO awful idea) or virtualization.
VMs are generally fine as long as you're fine with the encapsulated environment. It gets much less pleasant if you want to build a workflow on both the host and the VM or (even worse) on few VMs.

Microsoft has been going this direction for years now. They wanted to end the image of making software for office clerks. Just few examples: PowerShell (sadly didn't get the credit it deserves), Visual Studio, Bash in Windows, Microsoft R, SQL Server and now Linux integration. With every new release there are less and less reasons to go for a different OS.
And keep in mind this Linux VM can be way more interesting that what we usually get via Virtualbox or VMware. I'm not hoping for a seamless integration, but anything close to that would be a revolution and a revelation. :D

i've had to deal with dodgy VM's for linux to recover hard drives from a RAID array from a faulty NAS, this would have been so much simpler to deal with