This is not recommended for production development. It may be unstable and it will have bugs'
Are they talking about Windows in general , or WSL in particular with that quote?
Canonical has begun slinging daily builds of Ubuntu at Windows Subsystem for Linux. We took a look at the not-for-production code. Ubuntu has long been friends with the Windows Subsystem for Linux. If you pop wsl --install onto a virgin Windows 11 PC, the odds are it will be Canonical's Linux distribution that is installed by …
"This is not recommended for production development. It may be unstable and it will have bugs."
A bit too optimistic, methinks.
How about this:
This is not recommended. It will be unstable and it will have bugs.
There you go, fixed it for you.
I'd say that it adjusts more to reality.
Not that I'd let that crap anywhere near my Linux installations.
Why am I not surprised.
Because the writing has been on the wall for the longest time.
When you saw it, you both read and understood what it meant.*
This is all part of the same MS 30+ year old modus operandi : embrace, extend, and extinguish.
That's why you are not surprised.
Unfortunately, there's a legion of naysayers saying it is all nonsense.
* See: Deadly Embrace
Not as crazy as it sounded even a couple of years ago. Microsoft have made it very clear that their old model of one-off revenue from perpetual licence sales isn't enough any more. They want monetization, ongoing revenue and are shifting to SaaS for client and server. I can absolutely believe that to them, it's no longer about what OS the client endpoint runs. It's now all about how many Microsoft services and subscriptions can be layered onto it. From their point of view, not switch to Linux - or something built thereon - and offload the bulk of the maintenance, security and support costs to others?