4 ms·

Windows is definitely the worst part of anything Microsoft puts out. I really hope there is a new, light and fast operating system being worked on in Microsoft

Windows is definitely the worst part of anything Microsoft puts out. I really hope there is a new, light and fast operating system being worked on in Microsoft Labs. Something with a Linux core for developers with a brand new desktop environment could compete with MacBooks.

ToFab123 8y ago
I don't think they are. For many years Microsoft Research worked on an entirely new OS, codename Midori (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midori_(operating_system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midori_(operating_system)), and it actually went into the incubation phase (which is Microsoft speak for "This is no longer a research project. We are turning it into a product") Then it got cancel around 2 or 3 years ago … just before it otherwise would have become a beta. Today, they are not working on a new OS AFAIK. They are working on something called Andromeda. They have been working on that for, I don't know, 4-5 years or something like that. It is not a new OS. It is windows 10, but they have turned it very very very modular. It has a new adaptive shell named cshell as its party trick. Andromeda is really about that shell. Not so much about the modularity. The new shell, they are working on, can adapt to any screen size or form factor on the fly and enable Microsoft's wet dream: Turning a phone size device into a tablet sized device. You know from sci-fi movies "stretchable screens". you have a small phone size device, you stretch it and suddenly you have a book/newspaper/something-with-a-bigger-screen devices. Then you squeeze it back into phone size and put it into the pocket. Windows need a new shell for when those types of monitors become available and it is the redmonds wet dream to be the ones that comes with those devices. You might have stumbled across articles lately that Microsoft is about to launch (or have cancelled launching) a new device with 2 screens that you can turn in to 1 screen and there by turning a phone size device into a tablet). That is andromeda and apparently is has been delayed (or maybe cancelled. Who knows) because the software is not ready. The "not ready part" is this adaptable shell. (https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft-andromeda-everything-we-know-so-far https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft-andromeda-everythin...)
- pnloyd 8y ago
  It's hard to believe that such a stretchable device is feasible. Just can't imagine how that might work.
- naikrovek 8y ago
  Windows 10 IoT Core lately (on the insider previews) has a graphical shell that is FAR beyond what I ever thought I'd see on that platform. That platform is limited in ways that are difficult to describe succinctly, and even with those limitations, it is a useful platform for lightweight touch interfaces. Probably not as light as Linux can be made to be, but pretty freakin' lightweight, nonetheless. The only graphical apps that run on IoT Core are UWP apps (except for browser applications) and UWP applications handle resizing and spontaneous display resizing and changes in orientation very well. Web browsers handle this fine also, of course. I would bet that a motivated developer could create most of what you are describing relatively easily.
JadeNB 8y ago
> Something with a Linux core for developers with a brand new desktop environment could compete with MacBooks. I think that competing with MacBooks is first a matter of build quality. It's the hardware much more than the software that absolutely stands in my way of switching.
- trash_panda 8y ago
  I think it's hard for another company to win over current Macbook users. Maybe they lost a couple with the whole keyboard fiasco but they will fix it, they're not stupid. Also, Windows 10 is a really great operating system and they keep dominating the OS market share. The majority of enterprise users use and prefer Windows. I think most of the times we are not being honest about the real impact of productivity between different solutions. Is a proficient developer on Windows less productive than a proficient developer on macOS/Linux? Probably there are some differences; but is it really significant? What about build quality? I know Macs have god-tier touchpads, but if I'm at a desk I carry my mouse around and get by just fine. If I forget my mouse; I'm stuck with the clitoris of my old Lenovo, which I hate but I do my job just fine and don't stress over it. I know we like to nerd out on our choices; but the general market doesn't really care that much and that's why Windows keeps owning.
  - forapurpose 8y ago
    > The majority of enterprise users use and prefer Windows. I think the enterprise CIOs use Windows because switching isn't a consideration; they've made an enormous investment in it, and cost of switching also is astronomical - consider hiring / training an all-new IT staff, development team, etc for the new platform, then recreating/repurchasing and redeploying all software running natively, then retraining every user. Whether or not they like Windows is a non-issue.
    - trash_panda 8y ago
      I completely agree. But from my experience, there are actually a lot of users that really like Windows. In a corporate environment it works really well, and that's a good reason to appreciate it. And the fact that CIO/CTOs are not willing to migrate to a new OS may indicate that those "efficiency and productivity gains" macOS users brag about may not be significant :) I really understand the difference between different UIs and hardware, I'm an Linux with i3wm user myself; but I'm not blinded to the fact that even though I may think I'm more productive on a given software/hardware environment; those are not the factors that really weigh in (without going to extremes of course).
partiallypro 8y ago
They already have Linux on Windows now. They are beginning to thin out Windows and put it in different packages for different application uses. That's the point of their new Andromedia OS.
StaticRedux 8y ago
Windows Shell for Linux (Kernel). I've been wanting this for years. With .Net Core, PowerShell for Linux, MS SQL for Linux, and WSL, I feel like (hope) that that is where they are headed, and if so, it's going to be awesome. A Linux OS with Windows on top and full compatibility for DirectX, games, Office, etc. Ugh, one can dream...
- cwyers 8y ago
  The NT kernel has better hardware support than the Linux kernel (among other advantages), and the design of NT means that you can run Linux apps on the NT kernel without going through the Win32 APIs with WSL. Why do you need to rebase the system on the Linux kernel?
  - StaticRedux 8y ago
    For funsies.
    - pnloyd 8y ago
      Don't think Microsoft would go that far for funsies.
pjc50 8y ago
A new OS would have to either implement all the old interfaces of either Windows or POSIX, or face an adoption failure due to lack of apps.

ToFab123 8y ago

I don't think they are. For many years Microsoft Research worked on an entirely new OS, codename Midori (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midori_(operating_system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midori_(operating_system)), and it actually went into the incubation phase (which is Microsoft speak for "This is no longer a research project. We are turning it into a product") Then it got cancel around 2 or 3 years ago … just before it otherwise would have become a beta. Today, they are not working on a new OS AFAIK. They are working on something called Andromeda. They have been working on that for, I don't know, 4-5 years or something like that. It is not a new OS. It is windows 10, but they have turned it very very very modular. It has a new adaptive shell named cshell as its party trick. Andromeda is really about that shell. Not so much about the modularity. The new shell, they are working on, can adapt to any screen size or form factor on the fly and enable Microsoft's wet dream: Turning a phone size device into a tablet sized device. You know from sci-fi movies "stretchable screens". you have a small phone size device, you stretch it and suddenly you have a book/newspaper/something-with-a-bigger-screen devices. Then you squeeze it back into phone size and put it into the pocket. Windows need a new shell for when those types of monitors become available and it is the redmonds wet dream to be the ones that comes with those devices. You might have stumbled across articles lately that Microsoft is about to launch (or have cancelled launching) a new device with 2 screens that you can turn in to 1 screen and there by turning a phone size device into a tablet). That is andromeda and apparently is has been delayed (or maybe cancelled. Who knows) because the software is not ready. The "not ready part" is this adaptable shell. (https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft-andromeda-everything-we-know-so-far https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft-andromeda-everythin...)

pnloyd 8y ago
It's hard to believe that such a stretchable device is feasible. Just can't imagine how that might work.
naikrovek 8y ago
Windows 10 IoT Core lately (on the insider previews) has a graphical shell that is FAR beyond what I ever thought I'd see on that platform. That platform is limited in ways that are difficult to describe succinctly, and even with those limitations, it is a useful platform for lightweight touch interfaces. Probably not as light as Linux can be made to be, but pretty freakin' lightweight, nonetheless. The only graphical apps that run on IoT Core are UWP apps (except for browser applications) and UWP applications handle resizing and spontaneous display resizing and changes in orientation very well. Web browsers handle this fine also, of course. I would bet that a motivated developer could create most of what you are describing relatively easily.

JadeNB 8y ago

> Something with a Linux core for developers with a brand new desktop environment could compete with MacBooks. I think that competing with MacBooks is first a matter of build quality. It's the hardware much more than the software that absolutely stands in my way of switching.

trash_panda 8y ago
I think it's hard for another company to win over current Macbook users. Maybe they lost a couple with the whole keyboard fiasco but they will fix it, they're not stupid. Also, Windows 10 is a really great operating system and they keep dominating the OS market share. The majority of enterprise users use and prefer Windows. I think most of the times we are not being honest about the real impact of productivity between different solutions. Is a proficient developer on Windows less productive than a proficient developer on macOS/Linux? Probably there are some differences; but is it really significant? What about build quality? I know Macs have god-tier touchpads, but if I'm at a desk I carry my mouse around and get by just fine. If I forget my mouse; I'm stuck with the clitoris of my old Lenovo, which I hate but I do my job just fine and don't stress over it. I know we like to nerd out on our choices; but the general market doesn't really care that much and that's why Windows keeps owning.
- forapurpose 8y ago
  > The majority of enterprise users use and prefer Windows. I think the enterprise CIOs use Windows because switching isn't a consideration; they've made an enormous investment in it, and cost of switching also is astronomical - consider hiring / training an all-new IT staff, development team, etc for the new platform, then recreating/repurchasing and redeploying all software running natively, then retraining every user. Whether or not they like Windows is a non-issue.
  - trash_panda 8y ago
    I completely agree. But from my experience, there are actually a lot of users that really like Windows. In a corporate environment it works really well, and that's a good reason to appreciate it. And the fact that CIO/CTOs are not willing to migrate to a new OS may indicate that those "efficiency and productivity gains" macOS users brag about may not be significant :) I really understand the difference between different UIs and hardware, I'm an Linux with i3wm user myself; but I'm not blinded to the fact that even though I may think I'm more productive on a given software/hardware environment; those are not the factors that really weigh in (without going to extremes of course).

partiallypro 8y ago

They already have Linux on Windows now. They are beginning to thin out Windows and put it in different packages for different application uses. That's the point of their new Andromedia OS.

StaticRedux 8y ago

Windows Shell for Linux (Kernel). I've been wanting this for years. With .Net Core, PowerShell for Linux, MS SQL for Linux, and WSL, I feel like (hope) that that is where they are headed, and if so, it's going to be awesome. A Linux OS with Windows on top and full compatibility for DirectX, games, Office, etc. Ugh, one can dream...

cwyers 8y ago
The NT kernel has better hardware support than the Linux kernel (among other advantages), and the design of NT means that you can run Linux apps on the NT kernel without going through the Win32 APIs with WSL. Why do you need to rebase the system on the Linux kernel?
- StaticRedux 8y ago
  For funsies.
  - pnloyd 8y ago
    Don't think Microsoft would go that far for funsies.

pjc50 8y ago

A new OS would have to either implement all the old interfaces of either Windows or POSIX, or face an adoption failure due to lack of apps.