Microsoft Sponsors Linux Foundation Event 134
Posted
by
timothy
from the not-entirely-new dept.
from the not-entirely-new dept.
darthcamaro writes "There was a time when the Linux Foundation wouldn't take money from Microsoft. That time is not today — Microsoft is listed as a Gold Sponsor of the LinuxCon Europe event, paying $20,000 for the privilege and also getting a guaranteed speaking slot as a result."
Azure (Score:4, Informative)
Azure (the MS cloud) now supports Linux images. They probably want some attention for that.
Re:In other news.. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:In other news.. (Score:5, Informative)
Mitt Romney sponsors Obama's campaign victory.
Seems anti-antithetical for MS to host anything involving Linux... what's the catch?
Well as per this article Microsoft is offering Linux on its Azure platform [pcworld.com], so its quite reasonable for a major vendor of Linux services to want to be part of a Linux conference (and I had to stop myself from laughing out loud when I wrote that)
Re:In other news.. (Score:4, Informative)
And from another article from this year Microsoft cracks top 20 list of Linux contributors [theverge.com]. So again its reasonable for MS to be at the conference.
Re:Why all the corporate sponsorship press? (Score:4, Informative)
http://slashdot.org/submission [slashdot.org]
Re:In other news.. (Score:5, Informative)
I signed up for a 90 day demo Azure account, just to see how it compares to Amazon AWS, and was surprised as hell to see them offering Linux vms.. So just for giggles, spun one up, and sure enough, it was CentOS. They're pretty darn cheap on the demo though, I left the vm running and set a reminder to kill it before the 90 days was up, and about 30 days into the demo, I get an email telling me the account was getting close to running out of the "free" specs and I'd need to add a credit card for charges to continue.. This, mind you, on a vm thats just the os/normal services, nothing else running.. I went ahead and cancelled the demo.. Will stick to AWS and their free tier... I've had both a Win2003 AND an Ubuntu vm running there on the free tier for nearly six months, and both are actually runnning some remote services that I had been running on my home servers..
Re:time for a boycot (Score:2, Informative)
1) Removing giant kernel lock
2) Dramatically improved Wifi support
3) Much improved SMP scaling
4) D-Trace
5) Improved file system journeling
6) Improved scheduler
7) Super Pages
8) Some auditing framework needed for government systems
9) Full 64bit kernel
Apple didn't do all of the work, but the pioneered the required changes.
Re:In other news.. (Score:2, Informative)
Drivers? Like it or not with so many major subsystems constantly being futzed with drivers break a LOT more often on Linux than they do on Windows.
This of course makes complete sense if one takes only a second to think about it, you have multiple kernels, major changes to the subsystems, and only a limited number of devs, most of which have no ties to the hardware whose drivers they are working on. Compare this to Windows where you'll have a single kernel for the 10 year run of the OS, same subsystems, and the OEMs only have to make a single driver for that OS and its good for the life of that OS.
So...yeah, I can see why you would want to run a Windows host with multiple Linux VMs, and since MSFT has been bundling SUSE and selling licenses with WinServer for years I can see buying a slot to sell HyperV.