5 ms·

> it consists of a closed set of 45 downcalls with fixed semantics that provide a stateless interface. If the features 800+ syscalls can be put into 45 syscall

by majke 12y ago

> it consists of a closed set of 45 downcalls with fixed semantics that provide a stateless interface. If the features 800+ syscalls can be put into 45 syscalls, why not make an operating system that has only 45 syscalls? Then make the kernel modular.... and we've made a full circle in the OS design :)

roc 12y ago
> "why not make an operating system that has only 45 syscalls?" Because much of Microsoft's licensing revenue is contingent upon continuing to support the edge cases that are inevitably not part of the set of programs that can be dropped into such a sandbox without problems.
- pinkyand 12y ago
  There's a leak[1] talking about windows 9 possible being partly free, but some features are subscription based. That would give them the incentive to solve the security issues. [1]http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/04/the-inevitable-arrival-of-subscription-based-windows/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/04/the-in...
- Sanddancer 12y ago
  You missed the joke. NT was originally a pretty hardcore microkernel, with even things like graphics drivers being in userspace. However, in the name of performance, more and more stuff was brought into kernel space.
  - lobster_johnson 12y ago
    NT was never a true microkernel (much less a hardcore one), and was never intended to be. It was never designed to have any protection between its internal "subsystems" (file system I/O, security, HAL, drivers, etc.) — everything runs in kernel mode, in the same address space, and communicates using direct calls, not IPC. NT is sometimes mistaken for a microkernel partly because of the graphics driver problem, and partly because it contains a module which Microsoft actually refers to as "the microkernel". This part consists mostly of the scheduler. What is true about the NT kernel is that it's modular, with strict internal API separation between each subsystem, and that kind of design was (as far as I know) inspired by actual microkernels, as was the idea of hiding the kernel behind "OS personalities" such as Win32.
    - StillBored 12y ago
      IRPs are the kernel "IPC" mechanism used by NT... And for whole classes of drivers/subsystems IRPs are the core processing mechanism. The IO manager calls to process IRPs could very well be traditional microkernel message passing API's complete with task switching and message copies. While NT is not a microkernel, from a kernel API level it appears to basically be one, only missing the fact that everything is not actually isolated.
shaurz 12y ago
I would welcome a new Windows API to replace Win32. Not sure if they would ever expose it or continue with the old legacy crap.
- iNate2000 12y ago
  I thought that Microsoft intended WinRT to replace Win32...
  - shaurz 12y ago
    I had the impression that you couldn't make desktop apps with WinRT?
- kyberias 12y ago
  WinRT is not really a replacement for Win32 per se but it's a step towards that direction, right?
  - iNate2000 12y ago
    Right - A conceptual replacement, not a technical one.
  - pjmlp 12y ago
    More a refreshment from the past. WinRT is COM based, similar in concept to Ext-VOS, the percursor of .NET, before it got folded into .NET. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/dsyme/archive/2012/07/05/more-c-net-generics-history-the-msr-white-paper-from-mid-1999.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/dsyme/archive/2012/07/05/more-c-net-...

by majke 12y ago

roc 12y ago

> "why not make an operating system that has only 45 syscalls?" Because much of Microsoft's licensing revenue is contingent upon continuing to support the edge cases that are inevitably not part of the set of programs that can be dropped into such a sandbox without problems.

pinkyand 12y ago
There's a leak[1] talking about windows 9 possible being partly free, but some features are subscription based. That would give them the incentive to solve the security issues. [1]http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/04/the-inevitable-arrival-of-subscription-based-windows/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/04/the-in...
Sanddancer 12y ago
You missed the joke. NT was originally a pretty hardcore microkernel, with even things like graphics drivers being in userspace. However, in the name of performance, more and more stuff was brought into kernel space.
- lobster_johnson 12y ago
  NT was never a true microkernel (much less a hardcore one), and was never intended to be. It was never designed to have any protection between its internal "subsystems" (file system I/O, security, HAL, drivers, etc.) — everything runs in kernel mode, in the same address space, and communicates using direct calls, not IPC. NT is sometimes mistaken for a microkernel partly because of the graphics driver problem, and partly because it contains a module which Microsoft actually refers to as "the microkernel". This part consists mostly of the scheduler. What is true about the NT kernel is that it's modular, with strict internal API separation between each subsystem, and that kind of design was (as far as I know) inspired by actual microkernels, as was the idea of hiding the kernel behind "OS personalities" such as Win32.
  - StillBored 12y ago
    IRPs are the kernel "IPC" mechanism used by NT... And for whole classes of drivers/subsystems IRPs are the core processing mechanism. The IO manager calls to process IRPs could very well be traditional microkernel message passing API's complete with task switching and message copies. While NT is not a microkernel, from a kernel API level it appears to basically be one, only missing the fact that everything is not actually isolated.

shaurz 12y ago

I would welcome a new Windows API to replace Win32. Not sure if they would ever expose it or continue with the old legacy crap.

iNate2000 12y ago
I thought that Microsoft intended WinRT to replace Win32...
- shaurz 12y ago
  I had the impression that you couldn't make desktop apps with WinRT?
kyberias 12y ago
WinRT is not really a replacement for Win32 per se but it's a step towards that direction, right?
- iNate2000 12y ago
  Right - A conceptual replacement, not a technical one.
- pjmlp 12y ago
  More a refreshment from the past. WinRT is COM based, similar in concept to Ext-VOS, the percursor of .NET, before it got folded into .NET. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/dsyme/archive/2012/07/05/more-c-net-generics-history-the-msr-white-paper-from-mid-1999.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/dsyme/archive/2012/07/05/more-c-net-...