Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Windows Linux

Windows Server 2019 Will Feature Linux and Kubernetes Support (venturebeat.com) 99

Microsoft announced this week that it will launch the next major release of Windows Server later this year with better support for hybrid workloads, Linux workloads, and hyper-converged infrastructure. From a report: This release will succeed Windows Server 2016, which was made generally available in October 2016. While Microsoft moved to twice-yearly updates for Windows Server starting last year, the company bundles those changes into a long-term servicing channel once every two or three years for administrators who prefer less frequent releases. Those companies that haven't moved over to the semi-annual channel will get their first taste of Windows Server's Linux and Kubernetes support, which are currently in beta.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Windows Server 2019 Will Feature Linux and Kubernetes Support

Comments Filter:
  • I don't get it. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AlanObject ( 3603453 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @01:11PM (#56306295)

    What the hell would I want this for?

    All my Windows servers -- going back to still-running Windows/NT -- are hosted in a Linux-based hypervisor running as VMs. The older ones used to live on bare-metal and moved to a VM and the new ones have been VMs from the start.

    So if I wanted something that Linux provides that Windows does not why wouldn't I just instantiate another Linux VM? All my LAMP, Glassfish, Wikis, mail servers, etc etc are VMs hosted on Ubuntu LTS.

    (These days I never put a publicly routable IP address on a hypervisor environment.)

    I just don't get why what Microsoft is doing would be useful, other than it sounds awesome to people who don't know what they are doing.

    • I would assume it's more for Hyper-V environments where you're already running Windows Server as the host.

    • by llamalad ( 12917 )

      Embrace, extend, extinguish.

      Extinguish might be hard, but they've almost certainly got actual teams of smart people whose only job is to figure that out.

      At the very least they'll be able to sow discord and fragment communities.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      People who don't know what they're doing, yet you maintain LAMP servers and Wikis for a living?

      Stick to junior league kid, and leave the discussions about this sort of thing to the professionals.

    • I would assume that MS is trying to get more installs by showing some flexibility in what it can do on the server side. For example Server 2016 requires you to install a GUI if you want one; Windows Server is more driven by command line than before, etc.
    • Re:I don't get it. (Score:5, Informative)

      by chispito ( 1870390 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @01:53PM (#56306689)

      What the hell would I want this for?

      You wouldn't. Others will.

    • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

      You wouldn't. But Microsoft wants you to want it. Because this way they can continue the annexation of Linux, which is part of their overall plan to become the only OS manufacturer in the world. Which is precisely why you and everyone else needs to turn their nose up at this and continue to use standalone Linux.
    • So if I'm reading this correctly - because you don't need this - no one will.

  • Please stop! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by M0j0_j0j0 ( 1250800 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @01:29PM (#56306459)

    Having just recently installed a windows server for the first time for many years due to some crap software requiring MS SQL, I could never imagine how bad it is, the process management, the resource hogging, man why!!! Why!!!

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Having just recently installed a windows server for the first time for many years due to some crap software requiring MS SQL, I could never imagine how bad it is, the process management, the resource hogging, man why!!! Why!!!

      SQL Server is available for Linux. You don't have to use windows just for that.

      • Silly young man, you never worked with enterprise software did you? Nor just you need to stick with the MS flavour of it, you often need to stick to a specific version of it.

  • by Murdoch5 ( 1563847 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @01:29PM (#56306471)
    Why not just run Linux, the better OS, in the first place and when absolutely required (although rarely needed), run Windows Server in a VM?
    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Because it's M$ dream to have Linux thought of as a "Windows app" instead of an alternative (read: competing) operating system. Nothing better for them to use as leverage as being the gatekeeper for what is considered by most to be "Linux". "Does it work under M$/Linux? No? Then it's not getting installed."

      Also, when M$ finally shuts the door for users on Secure Boot, there will be less of an uproar because the users won't believe that they've lost anything. "You can still run it. Look I'm running the app r

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Your argument depends on linux being the "better" os, which is not a true argument.

    • See my other comment: https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... [slashdot.org]
    • by williamyf ( 227051 ) on Thursday March 22, 2018 @05:11PM (#56308215)

      Why not just run Linux, the better OS, in the first place and when absolutely required (although rarely needed), run Windows Server in a VM?

      Cloud computing for telco (OpenStack) technical trainer here:

      A few reasosn why this makes sense:

      Running Linux on top of Windows/Server Hyper-V

      There are shops which are "Mostly windows" for historical reasons. For them is cheaper to run windows through and thorough, and only when "absolutely required, but rarely needed" run linux in a VM. The alternative is to retrain the workforce, and that has costs measures in $, time and resistance to change.

      If your organization has the proper licensing scheme, Hyper-V is free (as in beer), while the "Certified Kosher/Halal Linux" virtualization solutions (Xen and KVM) cost a pretty penny, and the market leader solution (VMWare) cost more Still. So, even if your company is a Mostly linux shop, if you have the propper licensing, it may be less expensive to use Hyper-V, than the linux solutions available.

      In some environments (in particular, regulated environments), linux is costly (windows is costly too, of course), because you can only use the "Propper Linuxes", RedHat, Suse, and to a lesser extent Ubuntu and Debian. Other things will lack support from the hardware maker propper certification (think PCI, not the bus/slot, the certification). So, is not like you can go and use a linux OS/virtualization solution based on a Gentoo roll your own distro + Bochs + QEMU. So, the cost advantage of linux becomes less of a draw.

      In particular, if you want (or worse, are forced by internal/external regulation to) have support, red hat forces you to buy support for every single instance of redhat running in your environment, and not for select instances only...

      Running Linux apps inside Windows:

      In windows heavy shops, for administrators that come from an unix background, or can not grasp the power of Powershell, this is a boon.

      If an app you want to run (in the broad sense, from a propper ELF executable, to a measly shell script) is only available in windows, cool, you can go for it without firing a Linux VM

      Running Dockers containers in Windows:

      As docker gains traction, more apps will be developed as a set of containers. Microsot would rather you run those apps on their OS, especially for customers who are Windows Heavy, than cede the market, or try to develop their own.

      Hybrid Cloud:
      If you want to make Hybrid Cloud, whith seamless movement of workloads from private to public and back, the pecking order is Azure, then Openstack, and VMware a distant third.

      These are a few of the reasons why this makes sense, I am certain many in Slashdot can think of others.

      • Fair response.
    • Why not just run Linux

      Because performance of IT systems sucks when your admin has to print out and fax documents across the world because he can't figure out why chmod 777 exchangeserver.exe didn't work.

  • Can somebody send some English teachers up to Redmond?

    • by darkain ( 749283 )

      Service Channels are just the difference between current main line branches vs LTS branches. Thats it. If you want an LTS release, you use that "channel"/"branch", if you want the most latest and greatest, you pick that "channel"/"branch" instead.

  • This Linux shell is great and all but we still need this thing to run our Quake server.
  • Can we get ceph storage support in windows server?

How many NASA managers does it take to screw in a lightbulb? "That's a known problem... don't worry about it."

Working...