4 ms·
Nonsense. Soneone just told his opinion. How exactly would MS save money by using linux if they already own Windows? And some of us actually like working in wi
by jve 6y ago
Nonsense. Soneone just told his opinion. How exactly would MS save money by using linux if they already own Windows?
And some of us actually like working in windows, by the way.
- jka 6y agoI wouldn't make a bet based on it, but it's possible. Kernel engineering is challenging, precise and experience-based work and it's tricky to recruit and develop for those talents when your codebase is proprietary. A large number of companies depend on Linux, and that creates a common interest in multiple areas - reliability, architecture support, security, and so on. Under this suggestion, "Windows" as you experience it as a user might not change very much - but within the software stack, Linux would replace the existing proprietary kernel.
- simonblack 6y agoHow exactly would MS save money by using linux if they already own Windows? Easy. They replace those hundreds of expensive programmers who do nothing but maintain the Microsoft kernel with thousands of free programmers maintaining the Linux kernel. Notice I said 'Microsoft kernel' rather than 'Windows kernel'. That was to distinguish the Windows 'look and feel' code from the underlying invisible OS code. Those hundreds of Windows (Desktop) programmers will remain. It's very likely that you won't notice the difference between Windows with a Microsoft kernel and Windows with a Linux kernel.