41–50 of 225 posts
I see a lot of “why not” but no actual “why”. Microsoft loses strategic platform control and gains: ... crickets
Because in every other aspect but the very kernel (and the UI perhaps) Windows is a disaster. Windows Update especially.
Here's a dopey idea: What if Microsoft open-sourced the Windows NT kernel? (While retaining some proprietary drivers, etc..) If handled well, a community would blossom around "NT," with multiple "unofficial" distros (maybe one with full POSIX compatibility), and lots and lots of happy developers. If things went really well, they might even achieve the resources necessary to create Windows Phone 2.0. Microsoft could s…
But I don't think that has more interest than a Linux compatible subsystem, which they already have.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple only needed to support their own hardware. Microsoft would need to make Linux work wherever NT works, and would need to figure out a solution for third-party closed-source NT drivers. Besides, in a sense, Microsoft did this when they moved the desktop product line to NT. It wsa a similar compatibility break and a similar improvement in stability and switch to a robust, multiuser, preemptively-multitasking kerne…
A shortcut (perhaps the wrong word here) would be to migrate the Xbox to Xbox libraries on top of a Linux core. This would minimize the hardware for them to start with. After a couple years, they could make Windows server run on a Linux core, and then another couple years have Windows run on Linux. The whole progression could be pretty smooth, covering several years and taking a milestone-driven approach. With the su…
> In addition, for several years now, Microsoft's WSL developers have been working on mapping Linux API calls to Windows and vice-versa. A lot of the work needed for Windows apps to run without modification on Linux has already been done. This argument makes little sense: that "vice versa" is wholly unsubstantiated and without it the rest collapses. Making Linux binaries work on NT (which already has a subsystem conc…
https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2016/12/16/sql-se...
Hence the question what is the business model. It is nothing to do with technology. It is as godfather have taught it - nothing personal but business.
The article mentioned about azure, here Xbox, guess pc side the old business they do os and oem do hw (vs iphone and mac mode of integrated business down to make apple cpu), rental model ...
Hence the question is not about whether it can but how.
It is all business to Microsoft and google. A bit different on apple side in the past ...
That is why we should be worry. The old embrace, extend and extinct is logical path for all business and empire.
Anyway, they are moving and get that here and there like github. But would they worry as a buisness about java and android model.
Let us see.
Here's a dopey idea: What if Microsoft open-sourced the Windows NT kernel? (While retaining some proprietary drivers, etc..) If handled well, a community would blossom around "NT," with multiple "unofficial" distros (maybe one with full POSIX compatibility), and lots and lots of happy developers. If things went really well, they might even achieve the resources necessary to create Windows Phone 2.0. Microsoft could s…
I don't think you need an open source kernel for POSIX compatibility, afair NT allows different OS "personalities" to coexist and you could write a POSIX compatible one as a kernel module. But I don't think that has more interest than a Linux compatible subsystem, which they already have.
I suggested on Mini-Microsoft about 10 years ago that Microsoft do an 'Apple'. Apple took a free OS from BSD and put their own GUI over the top of it. I suggested that MSFT do the same sort of thing, that being to put their Windows GUI on top of the Linux OS instead of using the Linux X11 GUIs. This had the advantage that the underlying OS base would no longer need maintaining by Microsoft, and all their coding effor…
For the longest time I assumed MS would buy Ubuntu. I'm not a .NET dev currently running PopOs on my XPS 13. VS Code is my primary editor for all things. If MS released a desktop that looked this good and came batteries included for their tool chains and services I'd hop in a heart beat. My only guess is that doing so would lower consumer confidence in the corporate space? I know Chrome books are making a push there…
I'd like to use linux, and install it from time to time, but am always eventually worn down by problems, some trivial & some less so, that could mostly be solved, but at the cost of research & fiddling time I'm not interested in spending. The issues largely fall into two categories - missing software, and missing or undercooked hardware support. If Microsoft did signal to the market an increased long-term support for…
I'm in the same boat and have the same thoughts. I'm essentially trapped on OSX, and have been for a decade - sure, with enough pain and effort I might be able to kinda-sorta get by on linux, but in practise the barrier is just too high. And windows has never really even been an option until fairly recently. I'd love to see real competition in the OS space for people who need both a decent app ecosystem and open sour…
Me too until this May, when it was past time for my aging MB Pro to retire. I really couldn't justify a new one given I don't even like them any more (the Touchbar was the coup de grace).
Hence a Dell XPS 15, running Windows 10. I won't pretend the latter is anywhere near as good as OSX (less stable, less consistent UI, generally lower quality apps), but it does manage all the hardware well & gets the job done. WSL makes it livable-with.
I'd prefer linux though for its window manager choices, single-rooted filesystem, lack of nags & faster file io (among other things).
> I'd love to see real competition in the OS space for people who need both a decent app ecosystem and open source developer tools.
Quite.