(Disclaimer: I work at MS, but not on WSL, opinions are my own.)
I don't see how WSL is embrace-extend-extinguish. Embrace, yes. Extend? No. There's basically nothing that only runs on WSL and not real Linux. Only QoL integrations with the Windows shell like X11/Wayland and Explorer integration. The point of WSL is backend dev. If WSL were on an EEE path, you'd expect to see MS adding Windows-only integrations, and encouraging people to run WSL server instances. Instead, MS has never positioned WSL for prod use, and instead cautions against using it for non-dev activities. Even internally, we don't use WSL to host Linux stuff. We use CBL-Mariner instead [1], which is completely FOSS.
The whole point of WSL was that Windows lost to Linux for backend. Unlike Ballmer, Satya didn't want to waste resources fighting a losing battle, so he pivoted the company towards Azure and dev tooling and away from Windows Server. And that succeeded, and it's why we're not irrelevant like IBM - we ditched our mainframes, as it were.
> There's basically nothing that only runs on WSL and not real Linux.
Not going to weigh in on the other aspects of this but I think this is untrue nowadays. Direct3D off-screen rendering and DirectML are supported in WSL2 and while there are several Direct3D implementations that run on Linux, I don't think there has been an attempt at DirectML yet, and neither are ever going to be possible using official drivers and official DirectX like you can on Windows with WSL2.
WSL (carrot) plus UEFI Secure Boot (stick) exist to lure people who were considering switching to Linux away from running it on bare hardware, so that Microsoft can keep foisting spyware and advertising upon them.
> MS has never positioned WSL for prod use, and instead cautions against using it for non-dev activities.
Exactly, WSL is deliberately kept an inferior product so that people are discouraged from developing for Linux.
I do agree that Microsoft won't be able to extinguish Linux, especially through something like WSL, but they are attempting to retain market share for Windows desktop usage with it, and that's actually anti-Linux.
The only reason I even consider Windows as my OS these days is because of WSL, but even then I realize I still run into a lot of nonsense that is absent on Linux. One that comes to mind is how PyCharm has to whitelist project files so that Microsoft Defender doesn't scan them, and that requires a UAC prompt for every project I create. Give me a break.
not WSL, but dotnetcore, sure, crossplatform, all is great, microsoft loves linux.. run .net applications that produces GUI? nonas, this is of course not available, thats reserved for windows.
microsoft is the same old microsoft, and people would do well to remember it
I don't see how WSL is embrace-extend-extinguish. Embrace, yes. Extend? No. There's basically nothing that only runs on WSL and not real Linux. Only QoL integrations with the Windows shell like X11/Wayland and Explorer integration. The point of WSL is backend dev. If WSL were on an EEE path, you'd expect to see MS adding Windows-only integrations, and encouraging people to run WSL server instances. Instead, MS has never positioned WSL for prod use, and instead cautions against using it for non-dev activities. Even internally, we don't use WSL to host Linux stuff. We use CBL-Mariner instead [1], which is completely FOSS.
The whole point of WSL was that Windows lost to Linux for backend. Unlike Ballmer, Satya didn't want to waste resources fighting a losing battle, so he pivoted the company towards Azure and dev tooling and away from Windows Server. And that succeeded, and it's why we're not irrelevant like IBM - we ditched our mainframes, as it were.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBL-Mariner