That can already be done. This means that Microsoft is trying to encroach into Linux systems by offering to replace free server components with their costly, bug-ridden, and gigantic pseudo-equivalents.
I know it can be done with wine, or virtual machines running in linux, but those are really buggy- and don’t work well for lots of windows programs- Do you mean there’s another way to run ms products in linux?
[[by offering to replace free server components with their costly, bug-ridden, and gigantic pseudo-equivalents.]]
By ‘offering’? Or by force? Why would linux accept it if it’s an offer for something buggy and costly?
Costly? Bug-ridden? Gigantic?
Most enterprise customers are on an enterprise agreement with Microsoft, and having been the lead on most of our licensing efforts with MS over the last 5 years, I can tell you that their pricing is very fair, and they don’t charge for test/development environment distributions which is a lot different from RHEL.
Bug-ridden? Please cite to what OS you’re referring. Server 2012 R2 is absolutely nothing like the steaming pile that was NT4.0 or even 2003. I’ve never worked in a more stable, intuitive OS.
Gigantic? Server 2012 R2 Core runs on <10 GB of local disk. Server 2016 Nano will require <1 GB of local disk. Not sure of your definition of gigantic. RHEL 6 needs at least 8 GB of local disk just for a stripped-down install, and there’s no GUI.
More MS FUD coming from the uninformed. I love it. You all make my job easy.