3 ms·
Why would they throw away all driver compatibility and force themselves to rewrite all the userland libraries?
by TazeTSchnitzel 5y ago
Why would they throw away all driver compatibility and force themselves to rewrite all the userland libraries?
- hatch_q 5y agoWith Intel's acquisition of SiFive... for Windows to support RISC V they'd need to do that anyway. They did it for ARM64 (partially) and are struggling. They have to do bunch of stuff via emulation instead.
- raxxorrax 5y agoWindows on ARM wasn't really a success story. Don't know if I would be so enthusiastic about RISC V. I would like it, we need more open hardware. But I have no illusion that vendors like Microsoft, Google or Apple will first try to find a way to lock their systems down.
- TazeTSchnitzel 5y agoEh, not really. Windows NT has always been designed for multiple architectures. Well-written applications (and to some extent drivers) just need recompiling for the new architecture. Changing to a completely different kernel would be something else.
- xxs 5y agoTotally agree and I think Windows based on Linux kernel makes no sense... yet imagine the year of the Linux desktop coming true for real?
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y agoEven if they moved to the Linux kernel, which I think is incredibly unlikely and undesirable, they would have to replace so much of the disparately developed (and quite garbage) Linux Desktop userspace that you couldn't call it Linux Desktop any more than you could say the same about Android.
- xxs 5y ago...that was the joke
- yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago> and force themselves to rewrite all the userland libraries? They already did a lot of that for the Linux port of SQL Server, which as I understand it is basically the same program running with a bundled compatibility layer that's basically an official Microsoft equivalent of WINE.