![]() ![]() No less a luminary than Richard Stallman is on record as preferring VMS to Unix on purely technical merits alone. This was based on the old VMS operating system from the 1970’s. After 1995, to get around the severe limitations of DOS, a new operating system (NT, New Technology) was used as the basic kernal under the Windows shell. Windows was originally a shell run in DOS. Since then, there have been many many more bits added to make the complete Linux systems we have today. A bare kernel is a near useless bit of software. The GNU utilities were then used to make a complete system. The Linux kernel is actually a ground up rewrite of Unix. Several misunderstandings in the Article. Whether that will be the end of this civilisation or the year of linux desktop through gnu/linux/windows, or rather Glindows, remains to be seen Reply Tho that bloated mess is also a result of rigorous backwards compatibilityĪlso considering that microsoft joined the open inventions network, the linux foundation aaand soon is shipping an full linux kernel along side the existing kernel…………. Instead it is a lack of a stable ABI, which is also the reason why android kernels never get updated.Īs for why the linux kernel has no stable ABI, i have no idea but ironically a player like microsoft might be able contribute to one, considering that’s the one thing they did do right, even if the rest is bloated mess The real reason why the year of the linux desktop has yet to arrive is not the lack of popular, by the masses standard, software or driver problems or even newer hardware support, tho we are getting closer with latter two. The more i read about the linux kernel, the more i’m convinced of it, The fact that their source code would be open to the general public and the loss of some of their own unique features that make windows what it is, using a Linux kernel is probably not worth the trouble for Windows. But when it’s all said and done, considering the complications of the technicalities involved, lack of compatibility. In conclusion, there is no doubt about that Microsoft using a Linux kernel for windows will come with some advantages and added benefits. The backward compatibility which does not favor Linux users is an advantage for windows because, it is this feature that enables hundreds of thousands of outdated programs that are still in use to be able to be run. It would take a team of developers who would be doing something or trying to create something already existing in windows. ![]() The only choice would be to write your own software. No doubts about it, there are also things that other operating systems do better but there are also things done on windows that can’t be done at all on other operating systems. This step wouldn’t exactly favor Microsoft.įinally, Windows has its own unique features that can only be performed by the windows operating system and none other. Presently, Linux is licensed under the general public license which means that even if presently, Microsoft was to consider using Linux, it would have to make it’s source code available. In addition, Microsoft needed a new tailored kernel to satisfy and take into consideration both their present and future needs. ![]() Linux was not what it was now and their requirements were beyond expectations for PC’s of that era. Licenses and other issues involved with UNIX was another reason why when Microsoft needed a replacement for MS-DOS, they couldn’t go for it then. Again, this would confusing for the average user. They might have to bring forth their own format and rebrand Linux. This is most likely to also place them on opposite sides of the Linux community. In the end, it would involve lots of challenges that might not be worth it. This being the case, Microsoft’s only choice would be to either emulate the windows API and maintain compatibility with itself going forward so that it can fork the Linux Kernel whilst maintaining compatibility. In terms of the differences in technicalities, the Linux community doesn’t exactly have a thing for backward compatibility in comparison to the Microsoft users and neither do they develop a stable kernel ABI ( Application Binary Interface) to work against. Thirdly, there are things done on Windows that can’t be done on any other operating system. For one there is a huge difference in the technical aspects of the Linux Kernel and the NT kernel.Īnother reason would be the issues of licensing involved if Microsoft has to switch over to using the Linux kernel for windows. There are a number of reasons why Microsoft won’t use the Linux kernel for Windows. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |