3 ms·

So, you buy Windows to get better hardware compatibility for your Linux system on top of whatever Windows ecosystem brings you. I did something like that with n

So, you buy Windows to get better hardware compatibility for your Linux system on top of whatever Windows ecosystem brings you. I did something like that with non-Windows VM's. Although I couldn't find the link, there was an academic prototype you might have liked that used virtualization to reuse Windows drivers in other OS's or VM's. Seems like there could be a market for that where it's combined with recent enhancements in efficiency targeted toward people like you that want more compatibility. What do you think?

ChuckMcM 7y ago
In general I think it is an interesting idea. There has always been an economic issue with hardware manufacturers who were unwilling to expose too much information in an open source driver, and security issues of running a binary blob at ring level 0 in the kernel. Microsoft puts itself in the middle of that by certifying a driver through a vendor sign up / certification process, and since it doesn't require the vendor to release source, the vendor can keep that information secret. As a result you have more drivers for more hardware created under the "Made for Windows" driver development plan than you do from enthusiastic reverse engineering efforts in the Linux camp. To the extent that you can capture the value of Microsoft's oversight without having to pay the 'tax' of a Microsoft OS, you add value for the end users.
- nickpsecurity 7y ago
  There's another potential advantage. Thanks to SLAM, the Windows drivers have some strong verification against that interface. If one implements it well, then they get both benefits of Windows hardware in general and extra robustness of their driver verification. As in, drivers might be better than Linux drivers without such interface verification. The drawback being whatever in middle interfaces the Windows interface to the non-Windows VM's might introduce bugs. It must be correct and compatible.

ChuckMcM 7y ago

In general I think it is an interesting idea. There has always been an economic issue with hardware manufacturers who were unwilling to expose too much information in an open source driver, and security issues of running a binary blob at ring level 0 in the kernel. Microsoft puts itself in the middle of that by certifying a driver through a vendor sign up / certification process, and since it doesn't require the vendor to release source, the vendor can keep that information secret. As a result you have more drivers for more hardware created under the "Made for Windows" driver development plan than you do from enthusiastic reverse engineering efforts in the Linux camp. To the extent that you can capture the value of Microsoft's oversight without having to pay the 'tax' of a Microsoft OS, you add value for the end users.

nickpsecurity 7y ago
There's another potential advantage. Thanks to SLAM, the Windows drivers have some strong verification against that interface. If one implements it well, then they get both benefits of Windows hardware in general and extra robustness of their driver verification. As in, drivers might be better than Linux drivers without such interface verification. The drawback being whatever in middle interfaces the Windows interface to the non-Windows VM's might introduce bugs. It must be correct and compatible.