Why does Linux need to consider Windows with dual boot and all?
Posted by levensvraagstuk@reddit | linux | View on Reddit | 25 comments
I notice many linux users are begging to consider Windows with dual boot, are asking for help to reinstall windows after a failed dual boot. Should these people not go to r/Windows to consider Linux when they are installing Windows. Feels to me Linux has to Make sure Windows will always work fine with dual boot while Windows does not even bother to consider dual boot.
To me it is as if Linux has to play friends with Windows while Windows sees Linux, whatever Windows says or denys, as a cancer.
Albin1997536@reddit
I just use 2 separate SSDs and swap the sata cable.
UrbanPandaChef@reddit
Windows is the market leader on the consumer desktop side by a wide margin. As an underdog in that space you have to place nice with them, they don't have to play nice with you.
PCs usually come with Windows installed by default. So the majority of Windows users aren't in a dual boot situation and don't have to learn how to install an operating system. The reverse is not true for a Linux user.
EqualCrew9900@reddit
Microsoft is a reprehensible bully in its business practices.
chronic414de@reddit
I don't see it as Linux has to play friends with Windows but with the decision I make when I install both. It is my hardware and when I decide to install both systems, I expect that the OS respect it. Linux is all about doing what you want with your hardware while Microsoft doesn't give a f about my decision.
tomscharbach@reddit
Microsoft's WSL2 system allows Windows users to run Linux applications, integrated into Windows menus, in a small Type 1 hypervisor VM. I use WSL2 on all my Windows computers to run a few critical Linux applications, and my experience with WSL2 has been smooth and flawless.
Linux, on the other hand, has no equivalent to my knowledge. Windows applications run in a compatibility layer that sometimes works but sometimes doesn't, and often doesn't work well. It is almost impossible to run applications like Microsoft 365, Photoshop or AutoCAD/SolidWorks, for example, and these applications are frequently the reason why Linux users dual boot.
It seems to be that the question should be "Why hasn't Linux developed the equivalent of WSL2?"
Zeta_Erathos@reddit
I think the answer to that would be, very generally, 'because it's significantly easier for Microsoft to write a tight Linux VM with distro options when they have access to the source code than it is for Linux developers to write a tight Windows VM with no access to the source code.'
Not that I wouldn't love that to happen, mind you. WSL2 was the only thing that kept me sane back when I had to use Windows for a brief period a two years ago, and the ability to do the reverse with something like Photoshop would probably move a lot of people over to Linux.
But like, we can pair down the services on a Linux install. Windows is a huge monolithic megastructure designed to be used within its own display environment, with metric tonnes of services running at all times, and we can't even pick apart everything. It sounds like the reverse for Linux would be an absolute nightmare.
codenamek83@reddit
I’m not using WINE or other Windows compatibility layers at the moment, and it’s been a while since I last looked into them. I remember seeing discussions about the hurdles open-source developers face with compatibility tools due to Windows being closed-source.
Have you heard about WinApps? It sounds similar to WSL, enabling individual apps from a Windows VM or container to run seamlessly on the host.
jr735@reddit
Can Linux do that, though, realistically? And should they? If you want proprietary software, have at it. Buy it.
tomscharbach@reddit
I think so. WSL2 runs a distribution (say Ubuntu without the DE) in a small Type 1 hypervisor VM, using the Linux kernel. Linux applications run on the distribution natively.
I don't see any technical reason why Linux couldn't develop a similar system, running the Windows Linux kernel and other essentials in a small Type 1 virtual machine, allowing Windows applications to run natively on a Windows base without having to run a full Windows installation.
I'm not sure about licensing, but Linux users who dual boot or run Windows in a tradition VM need a Windows license, so I don't think that licensing should be a problem so long as the Linux user had a Windows license.
It would be a benefit for Linux users who need to run critical Windows applications. Being able to do so without the complexity of dual boot would be a great convenience.
That goes without saying. Using proprietary operating systems or applications without paying for licensing is theft, plain and simple.
I don't think that question is relevant to creating a WSL-2 equivalent for Linux, though. I am assuming that the Windows components would be licensed, as well as all Windows applications.
SaxonyFarmer@reddit
There are still applications and games that will not run on Linux (Steam, Wine, or Crossover) and VMs can be problematic and sluggish. If your livelihood requires a Windows application, you either have a machine dedicated to Windows or you dual boot.
jr735@reddit
Linux is about software freedom. Part of having software freedom, at least philosophically, would be to not destroy other software, no matter how poorly we think about said software.
When people ask in other subs how to fix a bootloader, I have some idea how to do that. If they want to know how to fix or install Windows, I don't know how to do that, and have no intention of learning that.
tomscharbach@reddit
Dual boot is not a topic of interest on Windows forums. Few Windows users dual boot or have any interest in doing so, because few Windows users use Linux or have any interest in doing so.
Linux users, on the other hand, often dual boot, or run Windows in VM's, and so on, because those Linux users need to run Windows applications for one reason or another. Accordingly, dual boot is a topic of interest on Linux forums.
I think that it is just that simple.
Old_One_I@reddit
Using your knowledge to help someone achieve their goals, in this case dual booting, is a fact of life that a lot of Linux users know all about. The reason they're facing this problem on the first place is because they're trying to install Linux. Helping someone with their problem is not a requirement, it's a choice and it's just about being a decent and considerate person.
EZtheOG@reddit
Ehhhh I dunno. I think it’s a bit reductive to be honest.
Mostly because if you zoom out I think there’s valuable info that comes from a problem with dual booting. It does teach a about boot partitions, file system formats, bla bla but also I do think it’s an important foundational experience for people who want to learn.
I think it would be hard to dissect this issue into Linux and windows only subreddits and if I wanted to be semantic then really the post should go to a systems subreddit.
hugh_jorgyn@reddit
It's not "playing friends with Windows". It's playing friends with your users/customers and their freedom of choice. The philosophy behind open source is to allow choice and control over one's device / OS, which includes allowing / helping people boot whatever they want on it. Those who implemented the ability to dual-boot were probably dual-booters themselves, and/or had many friends who needed that ability, so they gave them the freedom to do it.
Ezmiller_2@reddit
Using your OS of choice is not and should not be forced or a religion. I use what works best for the situation. Sometimes I use Slackware, sometimes I use Fedora or MX. At work, I have to use an XP machine because the PLC drivers weren’t updated for anything past win98. The boss doesn’t want to get a new saw because the manufacturer wants well over $300k for a new one. I have contingencies in place if the PC ever quits, but it won’t be pretty if it does.
severedsolo@reddit
Windows has market dominance, it is the defacto standard of operating systems, which means that we have to dance to it's tune. I totally understand what you're saying, but if we start going "don't care, go ask on r/Windows" then it's going to turn new users off. Which will a) hurt us (Linux users) in the long run and b) perpetuates the myth that Linux users are elitist.
99% of us on here have Windows experience and will have gone through this themselves, 99% of people on r/Windows won't have Linux experience. it makes more sense to ask here.
Phydoux@reddit
This exactly. We talk about elitist and I think 99% of the people at r/windows will just sh!t all over anyone wanting to dual boot Linux with their "prime" OS. Either that or they won't even know what Linux is. They're out there (people not knowing what Linux is and people who have never touched Linux) and questions about dual booting may confuse more than you know.
SnooRobots4768@reddit
Because while from a technical point of view it is indeed a windows problem, it is still a Linux problem when you consider the difference in adoption between both OS'es. 99% of all people use windows on their PCs and they neither care nor even know about Linux problems. While it is something that affects a lot of Linux users who still need dual boot for their work, study or even entertainment.
mwyvr@reddit
Why do you care?
Playing nice with other operating systems - which chould include BSDs - is not a bad thing, especially if one objective is to try to win over new users.
Tanking their Windows installation is a sure fire way of alienating potential new Linux users.
Be nice out there on the playground today.
Expensive_Sign5837@reddit
From what we have experienced, the main reason our customers need Windows dual boot is for School/Work if they are required to use an app that is only available on Windows.
Digging deeper, the reason their organization prefers these applications—mainly Microsoft products—could be attributed to Microsoft’s monopoly, or because Microsoft offer a level of support funded by its various revenue streams, that FOSS cannot because it is free.
So if a Linux user wants to be able to do their job or their studies, dual booting with windows is a feature they need..
bistrohopper@reddit
I think you might be using the word consider wrong
jpamills@reddit
They meant accommodate. Some languages don't distinguish between these meanings.
sebthauvette@reddit
If they ask the "Windows people", they will probably only receive solutions that overwrite the boot loader with something that works only for windows. So they will be wasting their time asking them.
It's not so much about who "should" be helping, it's more about who will usually provide the better help.
adrianvovk@reddit
Microsoft doesn't care all that much (they do care a little) about making sure that Windows plays nice when dual booting with an installation of Linux, because very very few of the people installing Windows are dual-booting Linux. Conversely, Linux distro developers need to care because a large chunk of the people installing Linux are installing it to dual-boot with a Windows installation.
It's just about market share. Effectively, almost 100% of new Windows installations are just installing Windows onto the whole drive, because Linux has so little market share