General > General Technical Chat
When will MS replace the NT-kernel in windows?
Bud:
You can't do that without porting hardware to Linux first, such as graphics. CADs do not draw straight on the display, they call graphics hardware.
tom66:
To be fair whilst Linux did historically have difficulty with graphics drivers, the situation is much much better now. Nvidia, AMD and Intel all have their own proprietary or open source drivers available, and Linux has display modesetting (drm) built in to the kernel now which works way better than the Windows solution. So that should not be a barrier for CAD software.
DimitriP:
--- Quote ---Actually, it seems that M$ has understood that operating systems nowadays are primarily used to provide a foundation for launching apps that rely on servers to be able to function- like facebook, instagram, google etc.
--- End quote ---
What you call "understood" I call MIS-understood.
You are describing chrome-os , and they attempted a mild version of it with the windows "S mode" abomination.
Hosted services are easier to manage , support and control than individual installations.
The user just wants to "get their stuff done".
nctnico:
--- Quote from: Bud on January 20, 2024, 04:28:14 pm ---You can't do that without porting hardware to Linux first, such as graphics. CADs do not draw straight on the display, they call graphics hardware.
--- End quote ---
No they don't. CAD software uses abstraction layers like OpenGL, Vulkan or (when ignorant) DirectX. The DOS days are long gone.
Graphics support on Linux has been excellent for over a decade already assuming you are not being stubborn by wanting to use open source drivers or buying a graphics card for which the manufacturer doesn't want to provide Linux drivers. For example: I used to be a big fan of Matrox video cards but stopped buying these because Matrox stopped providing Linux drivers.
Karel:
Technically, MS could replace the NT kernel with the Linux kernel and run their (proprietary / closed source) userland
and windows GUI on top and still charge the same $ for it.
Regarding backwards compatibility, they could also implement a binary translator or emulator.
Question is only, what would be more profitable in the long term. Keeping on maintaining the windows kernel or a
one time investment in the transition to a Linux kernel...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version