Why Microsoft should embrace Linux.

Gary Wisniewski on Scrapping The Windows Codebase (quotes from part 2/5)


Microsoft already tried to re-invent Windows once with Windows NT.  The problem is, while one set of OS experts in Microsoft is devising an excellent security framework, another set of "experts" is violating all the rules in the interest of "dumbing down the features" for users.

The Windows codebase is in bad shape.  It's unlikely that Microsoft, or indeed anyone, can fix it.  I am certain they will create a usable version of Vista.  But, I expect that one year after its release, we will not be looking back, happy that the problems are solved.  Instead, such an albatross of design can only yield new problems, and new challenges for Microsoft.

Get rid of it, and replace it.  But with what?  In the next post (coming in a couple days), I'll suggest that Linux be a part of a new strategy to revitalize the product line. 

I am waiting to hear more of his "New Win-Win Strategy" before any judgements, though this quote from the About page already speaks for itself...

... got screwed by Microsoft ...

Strangly enough, I can see Microsoft continuing just fine as an applications vendor for Linux/BSD, although knowing them they'll rig their programs so they only work on Microsoft's own distribution of Linux.

LINK PLEASE!!! 

is that someone using ie7?   ( )

Interesting read. I wonder if the author has any low level experience with either system? But somehow I see this unlikely event going the way Java did. Kind of like W3bbo said above, it would be the Microsoft version of kernel. I'm sure the Microsoft engineers have pulled apart the Linux kernel a few hundred times, though, and have already taken what they can from it.

re: androidi:  "The problem is, while one set of OS experts in Microsoft is devising an excellent security framework, another set of "experts" is violating all the rules in the interest of "dumbing down the features" for users.

Linux or no linux - ms has to open up more

In a post the other day - Labomba replied:

You know of all the UI stuff that is annoying, like the multiple dialogue warnings when delete stuff, all the extra bubble pop-ups,

you'd have to imagine that MS will give you the option to disable those.

They'll have something there for the Power Users, if not control panel options, maybe a power toy, if not a power toy, somebody will find the registry hack.

Minor annoyances such as these can be easily corrected.

I should have appened the post that prompted that reply with:  but it is everywhere - every little thing you do - has been moved for what seems like movings sake.  many are not adding value - just noise.  people know windows ok? its been 10-14 yrs - dont take out "arrange by size" and replace it with tagging for teens.

WOW

i agree with that first paragraph

not sure about linux or replacing it..

Am I really the only person to think it's just a tiny bit stupid to suggest replacing the underlying kernel, when all your gripes are directed at the user-mode interface? Or to see no business sense whatsoever in ditching control of over 90% of systems out there in favour of a fragmented, directionless alternative which is a very long way from running even 10% of the applications businesses rely upon?

But we are forgetting that the kernal in Vista is almost compleatly re-done, yes?

And why do people keep on suggesting that Linux's way is better?  Does Linux own over 90% of the market share?  If Linux was so monumental, it would have risen up and toppled the capitalist overlords and created a classless society.
but I digress.

agreed.  nt kernal (for now) then singularity (hopefully) later

*they need to be more open like linux though - im sure some people would help out

edit:  erik (mastercompiler) on c9 has my new vote for president of ms.  get it out, get it down,  get it done. period.

*in that case id want scoble as ceo ( hey hes been conteplating other offers)  charles as cto/cio - mini as head of hr and c9 to replace USER testing

edit: and of course Sampy - he runs xbox!

*edit - yes yes bill is chairman - and steveb is sales architect...

jamie wrote:



*edit - yes yes bill is chairman - and steveb is sales architect...

How would he know that the Windows codebase is fubard?  He sounds more like a Linux zot that anything at this point.

You have to remember, these guys are tech journalists, they are not developers, they do not work on OS code.  They just sit there and type like they know what they are talking about.  If you sat em in front of an IDE they couldnt write a line of code to save their life.  Most Linux users are the same way.  The average Linux user and average Linux journalists are not developers nor do they write OS code.  They simply repeat the same ignorance that they have heard through the "experts" in their community.  Sure, Microsoft has made tremendous mistakes with the Windows kernel, but at least they are trying to fix the problems.  The problem with alternative OS users is that they think everything not made by Microsoft is perfect.

alwaysmc2 wrote:

But we are forgetting that the kernal in Vista is almost compleatly re-done, yes?

And why do people keep on suggesting that Linux's way is better?  Does Linux own over 90% of the market share?  If Linux was so monumental, it would have risen up and toppled the capitalist overlords and created a classless society.
but I digress.

Cornelius Ellsonpeter wrote:

Interesting read. I wonder if the author has any low level experience with either system? But somehow I see this unlikely event going the way Java did. Kind of like W3bbo said above, it would be the Microsoft version of kernel. I'm sure the Microsoft engineers have pulled apart the Linux kernel a few hundred times, though, and have already taken what they can from it.

IRenderable wrote:



Cornelius Ellsonpeter wrote: Interesting read. I wonder if the author has any low level experience with either system? But somehow I see this unlikely event going the way Java did. Kind of like W3bbo said above, it would be the Microsoft version of kernel. I'm sure the Microsoft engineers have pulled apart the Linux kernel a few hundred times, though, and have already taken what they can from it.

I doubt it. They are probally to scared of getting sued to look at the Linux kernel because it's GPL. BSDs, probally.

I dont think it is about the community.  It is mainly about the architecture. The thing is windows is complicated but regular users dont care because it is packaged on every computer you could by for the past 14 years or something.  That builds consumer loyalty although somewhat forced.

Yea so the kernal is bloated, who cares, they still make money off of windows right.  Come on what average computer user is going to switch to linux and be happy?  None, because people are afraid of change and they personally care what is going on with the computer.  As long as the can surf, play solitare, write up a document and check email they will be fine.

I sometimes get the feeling that those who suggest this (scrap the current Windows codebase and rebuild it on Linux) watched Netscape's massive loss of market share while they spent several years rebuilding Mozilla from scratch and are trying to get MS do the same with Windows for the same result.

But I'm especially amused by those who suggest this as a way to get Vista or even Vienna+ out sooner than it will be in its current state.

The number of people outside MS, who have an intimate knowledge of the NT kernal, would be few and far between... I very much doubt this guy is one of them, or even has spoken directly to one of them.

As for comparing a graphic of lines and dots, supposedly representing IIS calls to Apache calls... and claiming that is a comparison of NT vs. LINUX... what is this guy smoking ??

The fact is that there have been only a handful of truly outstanding O/S architects in the last 30-40 years... Thompson/Ritchie (UNIX) and Cutler (RSX, VMS, NT) are definitely the pre-eminents.