4 ms·

There has been also speculation about adopting Linux kernel, but I don’t think there’s any evidence pointing to this direction. I think this must be one option

There has been also speculation about adopting Linux kernel, but I don’t think there’s any evidence pointing to this direction. I think this must be one option that is (or was) on table if they are also thinking about rebuilding whole windows.

FourthProtocol 5y ago
That makes backwards compatibility very challenging so is not really an option.
- Iolaum 5y ago
  WINE has demonstrated that this problem is solvable. They may not have the resources to make everything work seamlessly but that's not a problem for Microsoft.
  - tored 5y ago
    The thing is that backwards compatibility is already developed, it called Windows and already paid for. That is the problem with all these ideas of rebuilding, it cost lots of money for ending up in at same place you already are.
  - swiley 5y ago
    I would be shocked if Microsoft abandoned the NT kernel but I wouldn't be too surprised if they open sourced a lot of the win32 runtime and turned it into some community maintained thing. They've already done this with .net.
tored 5y ago
What would adopting a Linux kernel solve? Nothing. Problem here is not the NT Kernel, the problem is user space. So building everything on top of the Linux kernel would end up in the exact same position as before because the need of backwards compatibility, this would cost money with no benefit. And the thing is they have already integrated Linux with WSL2 and can now run Linux desktop applications anyway. Rebuilding Windows seems unlikely because there is no money in building operating systems, meaning for every operating system you build you need to maintain it indefinitely without getting paid for it. What Microsoft need to do is to find a new market for their products. With a new market you can package Windows (or whatever) to fit that market specifically.
- jpalomaki 5y ago
  One question likely is if backward compatibility is a must-have feature or if you can figure out different ways to achieve it. Like could you run the legacy apps in some virtualized environment. Windows used to be The platform you would use to run the apps developed with Microsoft technologies. Not sure about trends at large, but personally I would likely just go with Linux if I was creating something new with .net. Last year the rumours said Microsoft was planning to launch Windows 10X without immediate support for Win32. https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-10x/238014/windows-10x-delayed-to-2021-loses-win32-support https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-10x/238014/windows-...
watersb 5y ago
That would break the proprietary Nvidia and AMD graphics card drivers. Just as a start. Device driver universe on Windows may be a blessing or a curse, but entire industries have labored to make it sorta work, and to follow troubleshooting scripts (tech support) when it doesn't. Aside from that, the leading edge graphics card drivers are their own, multiple OS universes. With their own collection of hacks for specific games. I'm not familiar with the current state of high end gaming on Linux, but I believe Windows is still the platform for big game titles.
kyriakos 5y ago
The Windows NT kernel is on par if not better than the Linux kernel. Replacing it will add no benefit, all the issues described in the article are well above the kernel level.
- smitty1e 5y ago
  The very obvious benefit of outsourcing kernel development to Linux is cost avoidance. When there is a volunteer army that can go after Meltdown and Spectre orders of magnitude faster than the corporate stable of developers, the business case seems to make itself. Which might be among the reasons Mr.Softy has been a Platinum Parter of the Linux Foundation the last five years => https://www.itpro.com/strategy/27583/microsoft-joins-linux-foundation-as-platinum-partner https://www.itpro.com/strategy/27583/microsoft-joins-linux-f...
  - kyriakos 5y ago
    Fair point but still doesn't fix any of the immediate issues the article describes.
    - smitty1e 5y ago
      If you step back and look at the historical arc, it won't be much longer until Windows is a desktop experience on a Linux kernel, much as OSX is upon Darwin.

FourthProtocol 5y ago

That makes backwards compatibility very challenging so is not really an option.

Iolaum 5y ago
WINE has demonstrated that this problem is solvable. They may not have the resources to make everything work seamlessly but that's not a problem for Microsoft.
- tored 5y ago
  The thing is that backwards compatibility is already developed, it called Windows and already paid for. That is the problem with all these ideas of rebuilding, it cost lots of money for ending up in at same place you already are.
- swiley 5y ago
  I would be shocked if Microsoft abandoned the NT kernel but I wouldn't be too surprised if they open sourced a lot of the win32 runtime and turned it into some community maintained thing. They've already done this with .net.

tored 5y ago

What would adopting a Linux kernel solve? Nothing. Problem here is not the NT Kernel, the problem is user space. So building everything on top of the Linux kernel would end up in the exact same position as before because the need of backwards compatibility, this would cost money with no benefit. And the thing is they have already integrated Linux with WSL2 and can now run Linux desktop applications anyway. Rebuilding Windows seems unlikely because there is no money in building operating systems, meaning for every operating system you build you need to maintain it indefinitely without getting paid for it. What Microsoft need to do is to find a new market for their products. With a new market you can package Windows (or whatever) to fit that market specifically.

jpalomaki 5y ago
One question likely is if backward compatibility is a must-have feature or if you can figure out different ways to achieve it. Like could you run the legacy apps in some virtualized environment. Windows used to be The platform you would use to run the apps developed with Microsoft technologies. Not sure about trends at large, but personally I would likely just go with Linux if I was creating something new with .net. Last year the rumours said Microsoft was planning to launch Windows 10X without immediate support for Win32. https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-10x/238014/windows-10x-delayed-to-2021-loses-win32-support https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-10x/238014/windows-...

watersb 5y ago

That would break the proprietary Nvidia and AMD graphics card drivers. Just as a start. Device driver universe on Windows may be a blessing or a curse, but entire industries have labored to make it sorta work, and to follow troubleshooting scripts (tech support) when it doesn't. Aside from that, the leading edge graphics card drivers are their own, multiple OS universes. With their own collection of hacks for specific games. I'm not familiar with the current state of high end gaming on Linux, but I believe Windows is still the platform for big game titles.

kyriakos 5y ago

The Windows NT kernel is on par if not better than the Linux kernel. Replacing it will add no benefit, all the issues described in the article are well above the kernel level.

smitty1e 5y ago
The very obvious benefit of outsourcing kernel development to Linux is cost avoidance. When there is a volunteer army that can go after Meltdown and Spectre orders of magnitude faster than the corporate stable of developers, the business case seems to make itself. Which might be among the reasons Mr.Softy has been a Platinum Parter of the Linux Foundation the last five years => https://www.itpro.com/strategy/27583/microsoft-joins-linux-foundation-as-platinum-partner https://www.itpro.com/strategy/27583/microsoft-joins-linux-f...
- kyriakos 5y ago
  Fair point but still doesn't fix any of the immediate issues the article describes.
  - smitty1e 5y ago
    If you step back and look at the historical arc, it won't be much longer until Windows is a desktop experience on a Linux kernel, much as OSX is upon Darwin.