3 ms·

What? Why would that be a factor? It's a kernel. Why would it make a difference if the Windows desktop ran on a different kernel? MS has rolled out several diff

What? Why would that be a factor? It's a kernel. Why would it make a difference if the Windows desktop ran on a different kernel? MS has rolled out several different kernels over the history of Windows, why would it be any different? Just like OP mentioned look at MS switching Edge to the Chromium backend. To the user there's isn't a real difference. It's still Edge.

nitemice 7y ago
Except most of the unique features of Edge are gone. Maybe not all, but plenty of users will notice a difference in Edge when the Chromium version rolls out. Plus, word on the street is Microsoft's motivation to move to Chromium was totally different to that: it was a performance decision. Too many apps were using Electron, and the only way to improve their performance was to intregrate it into the OS.
- microwavecamera 7y ago
  >Maybe not all, but plenty of users will notice >Plus, word on the street is Come on, don't just start spewing a bunch of weasel words. It's fine if you disagree me and I won't downvote you if you do (I never downvote people for that reason) but at least put some effort into it. > Too many apps were using Electron, and the only way to improve their performance was to intregrate it into the OS. Well why wouldn't they just build out the Edge backend to be compatible with node.js to natively support the Electron API? Because it a waste of time and R&D money when Chromium does all that already and more with minimal cost. Why reinvent the wheel when you can get a run-flat radial tire for free?
naikrovek 7y ago
Microsoft sell Windows partly on the promise of backwards compatibility. A Linux kernel would destroy any real backwards compatibility possibilities, with prejudice. There are 1,000 privately developed and privately run Windows apps for every publicly available application, and those private applications are the backbone of businesses around the world. A Linux kernel would render a VERY large portion of those inoperable, even with WINE. A Windows with a Linux kernel will never replace traditional Windows. Some Microsoft OS may live alongside traditional Windows, at some point however, and it is unlikely to be Linux at all. There are lots of kernel architectures out there besides the ones that Linux and Windows use.
- microwavecamera 7y ago
  The Windows kernel isn't backwards compatible, just the API's which use compatibility libraries and the HAL to interface with the newer kernel. APIs and kernels are 2 different things. Think about the Linux kernel. How to we "talk" to it? Through libraries like glibc which provides an interface for C to make calls to the kernel. Something like WINE wouldn't be necessary. WINE is an open implementation of the Windows API. The WINE project is essentially reverse engineering the Windows API and mapping to the equivalent Linux syscalls. This wouldn't be an issue for MS. All they would have to do is implement a Windows API compatible equivalent of glibc and obviously wouldn't have licensing issues like the WINE project.
  - ngrilly 7y ago
    > Think about the Linux kernel. How to we "talk" to it? Through libraries like glibc which provides an interface for C to make calls to the kernel. No. We "talk" to the kernel through an ABI, not an API. Maintaining ABI compatibility is important because you can move a binary from one kernel version to another without recompiling and relinking your app.
squiggleblaz 7y ago
Did you see a different Edge developer preview than I did? The Chromium-based Edge that I have looks basically like Chromium. Firefox has a more native look than Dev Edge. But Windows is a bit of a hodge-podge, so maybe the user doesn't care.

nitemice 7y ago

Except most of the unique features of Edge are gone. Maybe not all, but plenty of users will notice a difference in Edge when the Chromium version rolls out. Plus, word on the street is Microsoft's motivation to move to Chromium was totally different to that: it was a performance decision. Too many apps were using Electron, and the only way to improve their performance was to intregrate it into the OS.

microwavecamera 7y ago
>Maybe not all, but plenty of users will notice >Plus, word on the street is Come on, don't just start spewing a bunch of weasel words. It's fine if you disagree me and I won't downvote you if you do (I never downvote people for that reason) but at least put some effort into it. > Too many apps were using Electron, and the only way to improve their performance was to intregrate it into the OS. Well why wouldn't they just build out the Edge backend to be compatible with node.js to natively support the Electron API? Because it a waste of time and R&D money when Chromium does all that already and more with minimal cost. Why reinvent the wheel when you can get a run-flat radial tire for free?

naikrovek 7y ago

Microsoft sell Windows partly on the promise of backwards compatibility. A Linux kernel would destroy any real backwards compatibility possibilities, with prejudice. There are 1,000 privately developed and privately run Windows apps for every publicly available application, and those private applications are the backbone of businesses around the world. A Linux kernel would render a VERY large portion of those inoperable, even with WINE. A Windows with a Linux kernel will never replace traditional Windows. Some Microsoft OS may live alongside traditional Windows, at some point however, and it is unlikely to be Linux at all. There are lots of kernel architectures out there besides the ones that Linux and Windows use.

microwavecamera 7y ago
The Windows kernel isn't backwards compatible, just the API's which use compatibility libraries and the HAL to interface with the newer kernel. APIs and kernels are 2 different things. Think about the Linux kernel. How to we "talk" to it? Through libraries like glibc which provides an interface for C to make calls to the kernel. Something like WINE wouldn't be necessary. WINE is an open implementation of the Windows API. The WINE project is essentially reverse engineering the Windows API and mapping to the equivalent Linux syscalls. This wouldn't be an issue for MS. All they would have to do is implement a Windows API compatible equivalent of glibc and obviously wouldn't have licensing issues like the WINE project.
- ngrilly 7y ago
  > Think about the Linux kernel. How to we "talk" to it? Through libraries like glibc which provides an interface for C to make calls to the kernel. No. We "talk" to the kernel through an ABI, not an API. Maintaining ABI compatibility is important because you can move a binary from one kernel version to another without recompiling and relinking your app.

squiggleblaz 7y ago

Did you see a different Edge developer preview than I did? The Chromium-based Edge that I have looks basically like Chromium. Firefox has a more native look than Dev Edge. But Windows is a bit of a hodge-podge, so maybe the user doesn't care.