Earlier quoted context omitted.
NTFS is just fine. Stable, reliable, fast, plenty of features for a general purpose file system.
...But no way can you wrap it into something that looks posix-y from the inside
Why would you want to?
Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
81–90 of 239 posts
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
UI of Windows is buggy and inconsistent. Kernel and low level stuff are actually very stable and good.
> Kernel and low level stuff are actually very stable and good. In their intended applications, which might or might not be the ones you need. The slowness of the filesystem that necessitated a whole custom caching layer in Git for Windows, or the slowness of process creation that necessitated adding “picoprocesses” to the kernel so that WSL1 would perform acceptably and still wasn’t enough for it to survive, those a…
The file system isn't slow. The slowness will be present in any file system due to the file system filters that all file system calls pass though.
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#83With how buggy their flagship OS has become, why would I trust anything else they release to be better? Or even if it does work well now, why should I expect it to stay that way? Microsoft has burned through all possible goodwill at this point, at least for me.
This isn't supposed to replace Windows, and it isn't a GUI desktop operating system at all. I doubt anyone working on this has anything to do with the modern Windows desktop UX.
> This isn't supposed to replace Windows,
OP wasn't suggesting it was, just that the lack of quality in one significant area of the company's output leads to a lack of confidence in other products that they release.
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Kernel and low level stuff are actually very stable and good. In their intended applications, which might or might not be the ones you need. The slowness of the filesystem that necessitated a whole custom caching layer in Git for Windows, or the slowness of process creation that necessitated adding “picoprocesses” to the kernel so that WSL1 would perform acceptably and still wasn’t enough for it to survive, those a…
This is not due to slowness of the file system. Native ntfs tools are much faster than Unix ones in some situations. The issue is that running Unix software on windows will naturally have a performance impact. You see the same thing in reverse using Wine on Linux. Windows uses a different design for IO so requires software to be written with that design in mind.
[flagged]
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#85at first I thought library OS might have meant an OS meant for use at a library. Honestly far less interesting to know I was wrong.
Me too. Honestly I was vibing on nostalgia for this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynix_(software)
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#86With how buggy their flagship OS has become, why would I trust anything else they release to be better? Or even if it does work well now, why should I expect it to stay that way? Microsoft has burned through all possible goodwill at this point, at least for me.
This isn't supposed to replace Windows, and it isn't a GUI desktop operating system at all. I doubt anyone working on this has anything to do with the modern Windows desktop UX.
but if the host OS is already comprised, what is the point of sandbox inside of it?
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
...But no way can you wrap it into something that looks posix-y from the inside
Why would you want to?
From the article, first use case:
> Example use cases include:
> * Running unmodified Linux programs on Windows
> * ...
That won't work if the unplugged Linux program assumes that mv replaces a file atomically; ntfs can't offer that.
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Kernel and low level stuff are actually very stable and good. This. A while ago a build of Win 11 was shared/leaked that was tailored for the Chinese government called "Windows G" and it had all the ads, games, telemetry, anti-malware and other bullshit removed and it flew on 4GB RAM. So Microsoft CAN DO IT, if they actually want to, they just don't want to for users. You can get something similar yourself at home r…
Talked about back in the Vista days publicly (I cannot find the articles now) - Microsoft has commitments to their hardware partners to help keep the hardware market from collapsing. So they are not incentivized to keep Win32_Lean_N_Mean, but instead to put up artificial limits on how old of hardware can run W11. I have no insider knowledge here, just this is a thing which get talked about around major Windows releas…
>Microsoft has commitments to their hardware partners to help keep the hardware market from collapsing.
Citation needed since that makes no logical sense. You want to sell your SW product to the most common denominator to increase your sales, not to a market of HW that people don't yet have. Sounds like FUD.
>but instead to put up artificial limits on how old of hardware can run W11
They're not artificial. POPCNT / SSE4.2 became a hard requirement starting with Windows 11 24H2 (2024) (but that's for older CPUs), and only intel 8th gen and up have well functioning support for Virtualization-Based Security (VBS), HVCI (Hypervisor-protected Code Integrity), and MBEC (Mode-Based Execution Control). That's besides the TPM 2.0 which isn't actually a hard requirement or feature used by everyone, the other ones are way more important.
So at which point do we consider HW-based security a necessity instead of an artificial limit? With the ever increase in vulnerabilities and attack vectors, you gotta rip the bandaid at some point.
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#89Copilot https://github.com/microsoft/litebox/blob/main/.github/copil...
To be expected, given how many organisations now require employees to use AI if they want to meet their OKRs, especially all that sell AI tools.
What's dumb, on top of everything, is needing to store non special standard operating procedures in specific AI folders and files when wanting to work with AI tooling.
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#90With how buggy their flagship OS has become, why would I trust anything else they release to be better? Or even if it does work well now, why should I expect it to stay that way? Microsoft has burned through all possible goodwill at this point, at least for me.
Microsoft employ over 100,000 engineers. I'd advise against assuming that everything produced by any of them is bad because of bugs in Windows.