Earlier quoted context omitted.
UI of Windows is buggy and inconsistent. Kernel and low level stuff are actually very stable and good.
NTFS, not so great.
Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
71–80 of 239 posts
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#72The lack of integrated sandboxing in windows compared to android/iphone is still frankly unacceptable. I've become increasingly paranoid about running any application on Windows (not that your average linux distro is even remotely better) and yet Apple and Google seem to be far, far ahead in user permissions (especially with GrapheneOS, god bless that team) and isolation of processes. Consumers and businesses deserve…
Linux excels over Windows in the area of security by a wide margin, I have no qualms about running an app on Linux versus Windows, any day of the week.
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#73Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#74Earlier 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. 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…
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#75at 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.
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#76Earlier 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…
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#77Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#78Earlier 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…
But there's another issue which is what cripples windows for dev! NTFS has a terrible design flaw which is the fact that small files, under 640 bytes, are stored in the MFT. The MFT ends up having serious lock contention so lots of small file changes are slow. This screws up anything Unixy and git horribly.
WSL1 was built on top of that problem which was one of the many reasons it was slow as molasses.
Also why ReFS and "dev drive" exist...
Re: Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just assume the only thing a human did was name write the initial prompt.
I read this type of (sour) comment more and more on this forum. To me it reads very cynical and I wonder what the author is trying to say with this. Are you perhaps negatively impacted by automatic coding?
| Yes | | Remind me later |