3 ms·

I keep suggesting to Softies that MSFT should 'do an Apple'. In other words, keep the Windows interface, but put it on top an open-source OS like BSD or Linux,

I keep suggesting to Softies that MSFT should 'do an Apple'. In other words, keep the Windows interface, but put it on top an open-source OS like BSD or Linux, just like Apple did decades ago. To maintain backwards capability with all the earlier Win32 stuff (etc), it would use an emulation interface that only needs to be written once, and used forever. That would free up hundreds (thousands?) of MSFT programmers to concentrate purely on the 'Windows' UX while leaving the underlying OS to be maintained by the open-source guys.

linkdd 5y ago
What about drivers for graphic/audio/etc... cards? The kernel architecture is drastically different, and many things would need rewriting. This could take years, even decades. Wine still does not emulate everything. The graphic stack (wayland/X.Org) is also completely different, this would require a complete rewrite of the Windows UI. Could also take years. I fail to see how your suggestion would be feasible.
- simonblack 5y ago
  Drivers should be the domain of the manufacturers. If they can't write drivers, who can? Historically, they've only supplied drivers for MSFT and Apple. (Intellectual property - closed source drivers). If MSFT starts using (say) BSD as the underlying OS, you'll immediately see those drivers appear. The graphic stack (wayland/X.Org) is also completely different, this would require a complete rewrite of the Windows UI. Could also take years. Why should MSFT have to use the Wayland or X.org GUI system? They already have their own GUI system, just as Apple have their own GUI system. In the near-term, they would just need to write an interface layer between the the current GUI and (as above) the BSD underlying OS. Over time they would streamline the interface between their GUI and BSD, eventually getting rid of the interface layer altogether.
sircastor 5y ago
I don’t think we’ll ever see that, but it’s a fantastic idea. I’ve wonder what MS’ income is from Windows, and if it’s worth the effort.

linkdd 5y ago

What about drivers for graphic/audio/etc... cards? The kernel architecture is drastically different, and many things would need rewriting. This could take years, even decades. Wine still does not emulate everything. The graphic stack (wayland/X.Org) is also completely different, this would require a complete rewrite of the Windows UI. Could also take years. I fail to see how your suggestion would be feasible.

simonblack 5y ago
Drivers should be the domain of the manufacturers. If they can't write drivers, who can? Historically, they've only supplied drivers for MSFT and Apple. (Intellectual property - closed source drivers). If MSFT starts using (say) BSD as the underlying OS, you'll immediately see those drivers appear. The graphic stack (wayland/X.Org) is also completely different, this would require a complete rewrite of the Windows UI. Could also take years. Why should MSFT have to use the Wayland or X.org GUI system? They already have their own GUI system, just as Apple have their own GUI system. In the near-term, they would just need to write an interface layer between the the current GUI and (as above) the BSD underlying OS. Over time they would streamline the interface between their GUI and BSD, eventually getting rid of the interface layer altogether.

sircastor 5y ago

I don’t think we’ll ever see that, but it’s a fantastic idea. I’ve wonder what MS’ income is from Windows, and if it’s worth the effort.