As mentioned by others, the emphasis in the name is on the fact that it's a Windows Subsystem. The historical precedent for this name is "Windows Services for UNIX", which similarly provided a Unix environment on Windows NT.

THAT IS IT! I was wondering why the name always felt funky. Although the name they have now is technically correct if you ignore standard noun to adjective conventions.

I believe this, like many things in the windows ecosystem, is deliberately confusing/takes advantage of linguistic ambiguity to create confusion in the observer and create a sort of implied sense or feeling of microsoft superiority...

E.g. having windows 1st sort of inflates the 'primacy' of windows with respect to linux; it is linux that is being made compatible with windows rather than the other way around.

Best things that come to mind are things from the windows UI - like the network privacy zones, having the 'basic' and 'advanced' control panel, etc.. Some things say 'windows is updating your computer' rather than 'your computer is updating windows' or some such... To me they have this sort of psychological undertone of 'always remember how microsoft is helping you make this confusing thing much easier.. you couldn't do it without us'

...or it's missing an apostrophe.

  a. Windows' Subsystem for Linux

  b. Window's Subsystem for Linux

Each option has its own sort of context.

If you're making it a possessive using an apostrophe, then it should be "Windows's Subsystem for Linux" because Windows is singular in that context.

That's not the entire story, unfortunately. There are other rules. For example, Windows might be considered a family name, as there are several Windows Operating Systems. Also, this is a technical name, and technical writing often follows different rules, specifically in cases such as this.

For the possessive form of Windows I would look at the Microsoft Manual of Style, which for me is the fourth edition.

Page 184: Possessive Nouns

--------------

Do not use the possessive form of Microsoft. Do not use the possessive form of other company names unless you have no other choice. And do not use the possessive form of a product, service, or feature name. You can use these names as adjectives, or you can use an of construction instead.

Microsoft style:

  the Windows interface

  Microsoft products, services, and technologies

  Word templates

--------------

The correct form of possessive context for words ending in "s," is with a dangling, trailing apostrophe, and omission of the extra "s."

> The correct form of possessive context for words ending in "s," is with a dangling, trailing apostrophe, and omission of the extra "s."

That is correct (or, at least, nearly universally agreed to) for possessives of plural nouns ending in “s”, style guides are mixed when it comes to other nouns ending in “s”, though the most common rule seems to be to use “’s”; while “windows” is plural, “Windows” as the name of the operating system is a proper noun that is not treated as plural.

I disagree. Microsoft is correct; mostly if not entirely.

Q: It's a subsystem? What kind of subsystem?

A: It's a Windows subsystem?

Q: A subsystem for what?

A: It's the Windows subsystem for Linux.

As another commentator mentioned, there's probably a missing possessive ("'s"), but even if we take the proper name to be more of an adjective modifying/qualifying "subsystem", it's a Windows subsystem, it's purpose is running Linux... the Windows Subsystem for Linux.

But we don't have the Windows Subsystem for Win32, the Windows Manager for I/O, etc., so while the naming is technically correct, it is inconsistent.

Sure there's a subsystem for win32.

"Windows Subsystem ___ Linux" could be fine, but "for" is not the correct word to put in that blank.

Why not "Linux Accompanied Windows"? Or "Still Windows but also some Linux"?

But Linux is the one part that is not present. It’s GNU software running in a Windows subsystem. GNU/Windows?

Not true in this instance. They implemented the Linux ABI, which means software can run on the linux subsystem without recompilation.

Cygwin allows running GNU software on Windows, but it doesn't implement the Linux ABI. Therefore Cygwin requires software recompilation.

The big advantage of WSL is that you can run native linux binaries.

#sigh# Clearly the joke was not funny if it had to be explained.

For decades, Richard Stallman has been calling it GNU/Linux, because the OS “aside from the kernel” was GNU, and Linux is the kernel. https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.en.html

Now, we have a Microsoft system that runs the Linux binaries, which are GNU according to Stallman, but not running them on the Linux kernel. You’re naming the entire system after the one component that is missing. By the same logic that normal Linux should be GNU/Linux, Linux containers on Windows should be GNU/Windows.

The whole point is having the Linux ABI. There are half a dozen ways to run GNU on Windows.