5 ms·

From what I understand NT already abstracts Win 32/64 APIs roughly the same way it abstracts the POSIX ones -- if they switched to Linux kernel + an abstraction

From what I understand NT already abstracts Win 32/64 APIs roughly the same way it abstracts the POSIX ones -- if they switched to Linux kernel + an abstraction layer for Win 64 (Official Microsoft Wine, basically) that's one less kernel and one less abstraction to maintain (WSL replaced by the kernel's native interface). I would happily pay for and operate such a product -- especially if I could install such a "Windows" as a subsystem upon some otherwise unmodified Linux distribution.

mey 8y ago
Primary issue with this would be driver support. Also there is value in the NT kernal itself in my opinion.
- acct1771 8y ago
  Because? What advantages does it offer?
  - nxc18 8y ago
    Read Windows Internals. It's a very different design from Linux. Worth learning about another approach to operating systems if you're at all interested. WNT evolved (spiritually) from VMS and has a lot of unique things in its structure. Note also that Windows already kind of is a perfectly serviceable Linux kernel through WSL. That's one of the unique things about NT - it was designed for binary compatibility for programs written for several distinct systems.
    - rkeene2 8y ago
      This compatibility layer approach is quite common. Solaris Linux Branded Zones and FreeBSD Linux Emulation Layer (now defunct?) also did the same thing.
    - chupasaurus 8y ago
      > perfectly serviceable Linux kernel through WSL Namespaces/cgroups?
- qwerty456127 8y ago
  > Primary issue with this would be driver support. Perhaps hardware vendors would just start dedicating more effort to Linux drivers development then. Nevertheless the way drivers work in Windows (separate programs instead of kernel modules) is still better itself.
freeone3000 8y ago
WSL doesn't actually run a Linux kernel - it's a linux api mapping, just like csrss is a Win32 mapping, to the windows kernel calls. So they're already only running one kernel, but it's NT.
- lotyrin 8y ago
  "One less kernel" here didn't refer to them having a linux kernel and not needing it, it referred to them having and maintaining NT but not needing it (instead, utilizing an external Linux kernel).

mey 8y ago

Primary issue with this would be driver support. Also there is value in the NT kernal itself in my opinion.

acct1771 8y ago
Because? What advantages does it offer?
- nxc18 8y ago
  Read Windows Internals. It's a very different design from Linux. Worth learning about another approach to operating systems if you're at all interested. WNT evolved (spiritually) from VMS and has a lot of unique things in its structure. Note also that Windows already kind of is a perfectly serviceable Linux kernel through WSL. That's one of the unique things about NT - it was designed for binary compatibility for programs written for several distinct systems.
  - rkeene2 8y ago
    This compatibility layer approach is quite common. Solaris Linux Branded Zones and FreeBSD Linux Emulation Layer (now defunct?) also did the same thing.
  - chupasaurus 8y ago
    > perfectly serviceable Linux kernel through WSL Namespaces/cgroups?
qwerty456127 8y ago
> Primary issue with this would be driver support. Perhaps hardware vendors would just start dedicating more effort to Linux drivers development then. Nevertheless the way drivers work in Windows (separate programs instead of kernel modules) is still better itself.

freeone3000 8y ago

WSL doesn't actually run a Linux kernel - it's a linux api mapping, just like csrss is a Win32 mapping, to the windows kernel calls. So they're already only running one kernel, but it's NT.

lotyrin 8y ago
"One less kernel" here didn't refer to them having a linux kernel and not needing it, it referred to them having and maintaining NT but not needing it (instead, utilizing an external Linux kernel).