18 ms·
Because the "UX" of Windows sucks, Microsoft will switch the "Kernel" to Linux? I don't get the argument. There are parts of Windows I don't like, so I have ch
by hougaard 8mo ago
Because the "UX" of Windows sucks, Microsoft will switch the "Kernel" to Linux?
I don't get the argument. There are parts of Windows I don't like, so I have chosen a 3rd-party (often open-source) replacement. The exact same process as I do on Linux. I don't see why I have to switch to Linux to have that freedom.
(and to be honest, I don't care where the taskbar is)
- keyle 8mo agoThis is a good point. The kernel stuff of Windows isn't really the problem. I've been on macOS for eons, but I still hope that some day, someone at microsoft will have the balls to make a Windows Redux. Which is just Windows 7 with a coat of paint; and less stuff, installable separately; geared towards speed and not stuffings.
- wincy 8mo agoIt’ll be like WoW classic servers or old school RuneScape, only for your OS.
- keyle 8mo agoI am completely oblivious to what you stated but it sounds about right :')
- daviddever23box 8mo agoReactOS has entered the chat.
- okanat 8mo agoI don't know about you but I am happy with most of the stuff that Microsoft still ships with Windows userspace (surprisingly) and kernel. Win32, stable driver APIs (I can still run Win11 on my old Nvidia GPU laptop which Linux doesn't support), COM, good remote desktop infrastructure, DirectX 12, WPF, ClearType or certain Win32 aspects like IO completiton ports (allows true async like uring does but in Windows since NT times) are all has some good engineering and widespread adoption. Many other OSes still copy what Windows offered in early 00s. They are fucking their last mile a big time. They fuck explorer, they fuck desktop experience. All in the name of stupid fads. Silicon Valley hustler Microsoft is worse than shirts with Ballmer's fluids Microsoft.
- pjmlp 8mo agoYes, I do miss Balmer. At least on what concerns Windows development, everything was much better with him, even if the command.com wasn't great, there were alternatives already. GUI frameworks have become a mess, .NET, C++ and Visual Studio are now AI tainted as well.
- tombert 8mo agoYeah, I was about to say. The NT kernel isn’t bad at all; it’s arguably better than Linux. It’s just that an OS is more than a kernel, and pretty much all the other crap in Windows is terrible. Honestly, what I would like them to do is make/support a modern Copy on Write filesystem so that System Restore actually works, and so that it’s easy to roll back when Windows Update borks your PC. You don’t need Linux for either of these things. You need software engineers to build a modern filesystem or make Windows natively support ZFS or something.
- vbezhenar 8mo agoDoes it really matter if NT kernel is good or not? I don't think so. What matters if it's cheaper to use Linux kernel instead of Windows kernel in terms of expenses. Just an example. Microsoft developed several browser engines: first Trident, then EdgeHTML. Edge wasn't bad, it was on par with Chrome, may be slightly behind, but nothing that couldn't be fixed with time. But Microsoft decided to abandon it and use Blink, because that was cheaper. I absolutely could see the same scenario in the future, when they would need to cut expenses. Just get Linux, wine, fix enough bugs to make explorer.exe and OneDrive.exe to run smoothly enough and ship it.
- selcuka 8mo ago> But Microsoft decided to abandon it and use Blink, because that was cheaper. True, but you don't generally need backward compatibility with HTML rendering engines. You definitely do with OS kernels.
- SllX 8mo agoThere is a world where Microsoft could make yet another soulless decision to kill something good they already have on the theory it would save some money, on the mistaken belief that the kernel is the problem with Windows. One would like to believe that as far gone as they are on Windows, they’re not that far gone. But hey, anything could happen.
- tsss 8mo ago
- firesteelrain 8mo agoNot just that; Active Directory is unmatched. That being said, Azure is already running a lot of Linux. So for backend, it’s somewhere between Linux and Windows depending on what you need to do But Azure also heavily runs Hyper V.
- p_ing 8mo agoAzure runs Linux for networking and Windows (Azure Host OS) for services.
- jesse__ 8mo agoI think OPs point is that people are going to eventually abandon the sinking Windows ship, because gamers are going to soon abandon ship en-masse. That certainly tracks for me (mostly a non-gaming Windows user). It follows that, at some threshold number of users, it becomes much cheaper to ship a Linux distro than to continue to support Windows proper. :shrug: Guess we'll see in 15 years.
- pjmlp 8mo agoYeah, that is why Valve needs Proton. /s Game studios don't care about Linux on the client side.
- torginus 8mo agoYes, this article makes very little logical sense. A logical argument should make some objective observations, and then derive interesting conclusions from said facts and perhaps a few educated guesses. This article lists a few random grievances (which I sympathize with), says linux is good now for games, and then presents the bombastic conclusion that Microsoft will deprecate Windows, without making any connection between the two.
- Sammi 8mo agoWhat does it matter if the NT kernel is any good when the rest of the OS isn't? Sooner or later Windows will be as relevant as Internet Explorer.