XPost: alt.comp.os.windows-11, comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.advocacy   
   From: ldo@nz.invalid   
      
   On Thu, 20 Nov 2025 02:45:47 -0500, Paul wrote:   
      
   > An assumption not in evidence.   
   >   
   > To me, it appeared whoever did the work, had the chops for it, and the   
   > two stages were planned. It wasn't "programming is too hard for me" or   
   > anything.   
      
   What was the point in creating WSL1, if it was the plan to throw it away   
   anyway in favour of WSL2?   
      
   No, it seems far more reasonable to conclude that Microsoft originally   
   thought it could successfully emulate Linux APIs on top of the Windows   
   kernel, using existing mechanisms supposedly built into it for that   
   purpose.   
      
   Only to discover, of course, that those mechanisms were not up to scratch.   
      
   If WSL1 had worked right, there wouldn’t have been a need for WSL2.   
      
   > The thing is, today you can run VirtualBox, VMWare, and WSL2 at the same   
   > time, so the users have lots of options for evaluating stuff.   
      
   Easier to do all that on Linux, let’s face it. Oh, and WINE, for doing to   
   Windows what WSL1 could not do to Linux.   
      
   Plus you have the option of containers as well. How well did Docker for   
   Windows go? There’s another ambitious Microsoft plan that ran afoul of   
   Windows limitations ...   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)