
Windows as a service? Now, there’s an argument for Linux - ohjeez
http://computerworld.com/article/3189408/linux/windows-as-a-service-now-there-s-an-argument-for-linux.html?nsdr=true
======
peterwwillis
_> I’ve been happily using Linux desktops for decades. They work. In fact,
they work well._

I have been using Linux since... 2000? Jesus. I've probably spent an entire
year of my life just setting up a computer to make it usable. (If you think
that's hyperbole, consider that i've been a serial distro tester, a distro
maintainer, _and_ I used Gentoo) And guess what's new? It's possibly worse
today than it was then.

I've set up four new laptops in the past 4 months for Linux. One for my
girlfriend, and three for me, using the latest distro versions of both brand-
spanking-new dedicated to crappy hardware, and brand-spanking-new of the same
old OS i've used for a decade and a half. The following are _some_ of the
things i've done to get Linux to work on these four machines.

I have sent multiple patches to distribution maintainers due to their OS
poorly handling hardware that was supported in the kernel several years ago. I
have spent hours trying to understand and properly enable hybrid graphics. I
have fought with X and various apps and machine-specific drivers to support
keyboard media buttons. I have edited X configs to support right click on a
touchpad. I have read about 50 webpages just to understand which graphics or
wlan driver i'm supposed to use, as it has changed multiple times for the same
hardware.

I have upgraded and customized kernels, manually modified bootloader settings,
built initrds, changed EFI settings, and dug through internet posts to figure
out how to shrink a Windows partition down to a reasonable size for a dual-
boot install (tricker than it seems, these days). I have upgraded firmware
packages, enabled non-standard package repos, upgraded browsers by hand, and
installed dock plugins to supplant the functionality the keyboard media
buttons simply never performed correctly. I have written custom scripts to get
an sd card to mount on plug-in, because the ones that already exist wouldn't
work without running "lspci -v" first, each time.

All of this, and more, was necessary to get four laptops (that were released
between 2014 and 2016) to provide the basic functionality that Windows and Mac
users take for granted. Linux on the desktop? Maybe it works well, I don't
know, I don't own a desktop anymore. But it's definitely shit on a laptop.

~~~
hedora
Think that's bad? Try switching back to windows. I've found it is at least as
bad, except you can't edit driver source to work around brain damage. It is
like staring into the abyss. I have no idea how normal people use computers
anymore.

MacOS doesn't run any software I want (except office, which is terrible, since
I know how to use windows office, and I no longer care enough to learn new
menus / keyboard shortcuts). Some weeks it fails to resume 3-5 times, but it
generally limps along, I guess. This makes it about as reliable as an average
well-chosen linux laptop, at 2-3x the cost, and with an inferior userspace
(for me, YMMV).

I just want there to be a company that makes a working linux box that is only
as terrible as a MacBook. This is a disturbingly low bar. I guess the dell xps
developer edition exists. That might be a good bet (especially after Ubuntu
actually kills Unity).

~~~
nycticorax
> Think that's bad? Try switching back to windows. I've found it is at least
> as bad, except you can't edit driver source to work around brain damage. It
> is like staring into the abyss.

This does not match my experience _at all_. I've installed both Linux and
Windows on a lot of different hardware, and getting all the hardware to work
under Linux is always harder. Probably partly because the manufacturer took
care to make sure everything is workable under Windows, whereas Linux support
was usually not even on the radar. Sure, there are plenty of annoyances on
Windows, like how the Nvidia and Realtek driver installers also install a
bunch of other software that you probably mostly don't need, but at least the
hardware works once you're done with the driver install.

------
hb3b
And of course in typical Azure fashion this service requires an enterprise
agreement, can't be tested using free credits, and requires a 12 seat up-front
commitment. I'm interested to know if anyone knows of a cheaper service than
this or AWS Workspaces from a reputable provider.

~~~
DTE
You could try Paperspace (YCW15,
[https://www.paperspace.com](https://www.paperspace.com)) for hosted Windows
or Linux desktops. We run our own hardware to keep costs low, all instances
have a GPU, and we built a streaming algorithm that works extremely well. We
also have native apps for all desktop platforms and a killer web receiver as
well :)

[disclaimer: I'm one of the co-founders]

~~~
throwaway993324
Nice! Do you guys have any plans to support macOS in the future?

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
It says here[1] they have a Mac app.

Or did you mean offering MacOS as a virtual desktop? I don't believe there is
a MacOS license that allows this.

1\. [https://www.paperspace.com/app](https://www.paperspace.com/app)

------
tracker1
If I could use VS in a reasonably sized VM over RDP for under, or around
$20/month, I would jump at it... however, generally speaking, less than 8GB
RAM is a non-starter, and much more than $20/month, I'll just keep windows on
my main desktop.

As it is, VS and a few utilities are all I need windows for. Even then, a good
build server might circumvent part of that. My own experience is really mixed
though.

~~~
hedora
How many hours would you actually be logged in? In an 8 hour work day, I'm
lucky to spend 5 actually typing code or waiting for a build. 5/24 * monthly
"always on" rate might make the constant factors work.

As an aside, I think the whole premise is flawed, assuming you are more
productive if you admin your own box. Spend $500-$1000 on something you can
shove under your desk, and rdp/ssh/vnc to that.

I think the price/perf on that still murders the cloud, though I don't really
care, since I like my privacy and haven't run the numbers recently.

~~~
candiodari
I don't understand this at all. Cloud is vastly more expensive. Everything.
From hard-drive space (compare buy + colocate with S3, even with raid-1) to
cpu.

And as for network traffic ... everything murders the cloud in efficiency.

~~~
tracker1
With cloud, I don't have to maintain the machine, or ask the IT guys at the
office to poke open holes to access that machine... I can also access the same
environment configured from work and home, and on the road, wherever... no
need to keep a windows machine/vm. I was pretty happy with my Chromebook,
except for "enterprise vpn" access not working, and wouldn't mind that
interface when traveling.

I know there are other trade-offs, but having a working environment counts for
a lot too.

~~~
candiodari
I get that this is a factor for huge companies. They can avoid their own
employees and instead try to navigate Amazon's, Google's or Microsoft's
service departments. And I get it : mostly a big step up. It's a sad
commentary on the quality of most organizations.

And especially in those cases, it's not worth it. A good IT department would
be far cheaper than paying for a high-traffic site with lots of backend
infrastructure like a bank would have.

~~~
tracker1
I can also work from anywhere I have access to a computer to remote in from.
No need to carry a work and personal device with me everywhere.

------
youdontknowtho
Im really not a fan of this guys writing. I admire his trolling abilities in
the Dvorak style, but he does write a lot of articles that are button pushers.

Side note...I started evaluating elementary OS last night.

~~~
astrodust
Dvorak is like the Ann Coulter of tech writing.

~~~
youdontknowtho
Yeah, it's pretty wretched. I do miss the old "byte magazine" though. It was
awesome.

~~~
astrodust
It is amusing how he went from being a die-hard PC curmudgeon that would troll
Mac fans to one that was a Mac enthusiast who trolled PC people. Anything for
the clicks!

------
throwaway2016a
VirtualBox (a free Virtual Machine) has RDP built in (you can enable it even
if the guest operating system doesn't support it because it is done on a VM
level).

I've never tried it but I wonder what performance you would see by trying to
do all your work over RDP to a VirtualBox machine sitting on a headless server
somewhere.

~~~
rchowe
I've had more luck (i.e. more usable performance) with the NoMachine remote
desktop product (basically X11 forwarding).

For a while I was also using GNU Screen over SSH too.

~~~
throwaway2048
setting up nomachine is a real hassle though, for some reason they feel it
nessisary to completely replicate the linux login infrastructure, aswell as
mantaining a whole heap of paralell dependencies (that needs separate
configuring, including a version of x11 from 2005 that causes some real
headaches) for no apparent reason.

Why cant it just be an x11 proxy rather than an x11 proxy plus an entire
authorization infrastructure?

~~~
kasabali
I guess you wanted to setup an enterprise authentication scheme?

For a simple desktop usage all I did was installing the deb package on the
server and it was ready to go. I just entered my ssh details on the client and
done, remote desktop at my fingertips. no manual setup, no external
authorization, no dependency hell.

------
stuartd
We'll just conveniently ignore the costs of retraining users and of replacing
any legacy systems they may use. Ooh look, shiny Linux!

~~~
ld00d
Windows updates broke your in-house mission critical application, but it
should run just fine on Linux. /s

~~~
harry8
When you rewrite your now hosed mission critical app you won't get screwed
again. Seems like a reasonable response to getting screwed to me to move to a
different supplier. But hey, making better friends with whatever supplier is
screwing you without your consent could work too..? Deciding they're really ok
and coming to terms with it as the natural order of things could work too..?
Protecting yourself and claiming autonomy isn't the only solution by any
means.

~~~
ThrowawayR2
Right, the update process for Linux distros never, ever breaks anything so
it's perfectly safe. /s

~~~
harry8
No, the advantage is that the update process is in your control not your
suppliers. Which was the whole point of the article if you'd care to read it.

You can disagree with the utility of having that control yourself vs having it
controlled by your supplier. If people here believe that utility to be not
worthwhile from their direct experience - that's something I'd really like to
hear because I'd likely learn something from it.

I'm not sure I learn much from your response.

~~~
candiodari
Windows and Microsoft in general are legendary for how good their backwards
compatibility is. There's this game from on windows 3.1 I like to play, and
I've just got the exe somewhere, "world empire 2", it just works. This is
surprisingly common.

A linux binary from 20 years ago is just not going to start. Even the basic
libc wouldn't be there.

~~~
harry8
Which implies why nobody ever need worry about windows upgrades being pushed
out and hosing their mission critical apps without their consent. This also
implies the article is full of shit. But I guess world empire 2 wasn't mission
critical for this guy..?

