And they are partnering with CyanogenMod to get it on their phones/tablets.
Is Microsoft doing an IBM-like refocusing?
Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
21–30 of 192 posts
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#22now someone suing MS for patent infringement for using Linux - would make me giggle
What I was thinking too. Maybe BSD would have suited them better?
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm currently in my first nix job after years with Windows. It's a larger company (15k+ people) and using RedHat for it's linux solution (solaris/aix is also present). Honestly, I don't understand the $$$ argument at the enterprise level against msoft. Not only are you paying Redhat for support but their RPMs are about a year behind what's out there (that's a lot of time!). I'm trying to get .net (coreclr) compiled n…
Lot's of Shops use Ubuntu, yes. However you could also use CentOS or Fedora to be more flexible then with RedHat, especially when it comes to costs. 'Mostly' you don't need the Enterprise support, however without any paying for it we won't have Fedora / CentOS in the future. ;)
[deleted]
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#24Don't know anyone's ages here, but is anyone fascinated by the historical implications of this? I started using Linux in the 90's and the talk in the community at the time was "world domination". It seems to me that's happened--more or less behind the scenes, but it's happened.
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an hybrid kernel, able to do asynchronous IO better than open source UNIX clones, adoption of C++ instead of bare bones unsafe C and an OOP ABI (COM), I look forward to the existence of Windows as server OS. There are lots of MS only shops out there and I don't see any of the changing in the near future.
>As an hybrid kernel I must ask, what exactly makes the current NT kernel a 'hybrid' kernel ?
It still makes use of the original micro-kernel design,with kernel level RPC to separate modules. Thus still offering a micro-kernel cleanness in a monolithic space.
Also since Windows Vista many drivers are now implemented in user space, with minimal kernel primitives.
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an hybrid kernel, able to do asynchronous IO better than open source UNIX clones, adoption of C++ instead of bare bones unsafe C and an OOP ABI (COM), I look forward to the existence of Windows as server OS. There are lots of MS only shops out there and I don't see any of the changing in the near future.
When I first saw a whole stack of low latency C++ Win32 based servers running on Windows supporting an interest rate trading business back in 2004 I was amazed. Talarian SmartSockets was used for interprocess pub/sub between servers. There was no COM. No thread pools, just a handful of threads in each process executing distinct code. Very clean async design. Back then Linux didn't have lightweight threads, IIRC. I th…
Windows IO completion ports and the way threads are scheduled are probably only beaten by Solaris and Aix specific APIs.
Most FOSS devs never care to learn such APIs and stay with the lowest common denominator that happens to exist in GNU/Linux and *BSD.
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#27I'd quite like to see the NT kernel with gnu userland, and unixy virtual filesystems.
There's no denying the NT kernel is an excellent piece of engineering.
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#28Don't know anyone's ages here, but is anyone fascinated by the historical implications of this? I started using Linux in the 90's and the talk in the community at the time was "world domination". It seems to me that's happened--more or less behind the scenes, but it's happened.
I'm 35, started using Linux in '97 so I've been around for most of the history.
It's quite amazing how Microsoft has changed in that time tbh from "Embrace, Extinguish, Extend" and all the shenanigans they pulled with comparing Win2k vs Linux/Samba and the halloween memo through to submitting code to the kernel, using Linux as a guest in their VM stuff and now using it internally not to mention making .Net a first class citizen (which when it's done will be incredible, I love C# as a language but in Linux land it's not quite their yet compared to on Windows).
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#29I'd quite like to see the NT kernel with gnu userland, and unixy virtual filesystems. There's no denying the NT kernel is an excellent piece of engineering.
Re: Microsoft has developed its own Linux: in-house software-defined networking OS
#30Don't know anyone's ages here, but is anyone fascinated by the historical implications of this? I started using Linux in the 90's and the talk in the community at the time was "world domination". It seems to me that's happened--more or less behind the scenes, but it's happened.
Yes, Linux has dominated the commodity server space. Look what happened to Sun & Solaris. But what about the desktop? Back in the late 90s there was much talk of how the Linux desktop would take over, KDE vs Gnome etc. IBM and Sun backed Open Office, Andy Herzfeld launched Nautilus. And then it didn't happen. MS still owns the business desktop with Windows & Office. And MS still has a big chunk of the consumer desktop, though Apple has taken a lot of it with MacOS.