Wine is more like emulating Windows API behavior on Linux, while WSL is Microsoft throwing their hands in the air and saying "Lets just VM Linux wholesale".
Both aim to avoid Windows, neither replace Linux but instead tries to move more to Linux.
>Both aim to avoid Windows, neither replace Linux but instead tries to move more to Linux.
I don't agree: WSL is an attempt to use programs developed for Linux in Windows. It is clearly for people who want to use Linux programs but don't want the headache of setting up Linux or dual booting.
> WSL is an attempt to use programs developed for Linux in Windows.
Then I'd think it be available as a "right-click > Launch Linux Program" or something like that, like WSL1, rather than the VM approach WSL2 takes which gives you entire environment. Even Microsoft themselves market WSL like that:
I agree with your last part though, it's for people who want to use Linux without the headache of dual-booting or managing their own VMs, so they use predefined packaged VMs ala WSL instead.
I guess I was more contesting that WSL is for people to get away from Windows, when it is actually the other way around; it reduces the friction between tools developed to only work on Linux and Windows users, so that the Windows user can stay using just Windows. Back when I used Windows, this was always a point of contention for installing most dev related apps, and trying to use MinGW was such a pain (WSL was broken on my computer then due to Hyper-V being BIOS disabled). I used Linux now on my main computer, but I recently tried WSL on a family member's computer and I can see how if you just do all dev work in WSL, you would never have to go through the process of migrating to an entirely new OS and still get all of the benefits.
If I run WSL it’s because I try to avoid Linux - but I want to run something that needs a Linux environment. I think the argument about what’s avoiding what is pretty strange.
