Microsoft's New Core OS Team Learning from Linux 732
sokk writes "Seems like Microsoft is paying attention to the Linux way of doing things. According to itworld.com, a new central engineering division will work on the core of Windows: "The Windows Core Operating System Division (COSD), within the company's Platforms Group, will be responsible for the core OS platform, including development, program management and testing, Microsoft said in a statement sent via e-mail.". A little further down the page analyst Rob Enderle: "They have been studying Linux extensively. Part of their study has been on how Linux has been able to maintain a high level of consistency in the kernel while groups around it maintain maximum flexibility,".
"
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Release Date (Score:4, Informative)
Looks like they're still looking at a 2006 release. (Come on, fourth quarter 2005 always means 2006).
The question is, will assembling this team help them meet that goal or will the initial organization of it take away some time and delay the project more?
I can't say from experience on what the effects of forming a new style of management to a project, no matter how capable that style is, will do as a project is underway but I'd assume there would be some hassles to start things off with and get the ball rolling.
Now we'll have to endure... (Score:2, Informative)
Microsoft tried this. Remember NT 3? (Score:3, Informative)
Microsoft has had a terrible time transitioning people from the DOS-Win3.1-Win95-Win98-WinME family to the NT-based systems. More than half of Windows-based desktops worldwide are still running DOS-family OSs. Even though they've all been discontinued. Even though they have zero security and crash constantly. They're still out there.
They are looking for developers too (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Difference: Linux developers are cream of the c (Score:2, Informative)
That's partly (if not more than partly) because of the (traditionally) high cost for your ticket to enter Linux/Un*x Land (both monitarily and intellectually). Keep the entry barriers high (steep learning curve, tools that are difficult to use, etc.) and the only ones who can stick it out will typically be the above average folks.
On the other hand, make it so that any Joe Shmoe can cobble together *something* that works (at least works a fair amount of the time) and you get more people developing on it (ever hear of VB?).
Things are changing with Linux dropping the cost point of entry and the intellectual point of entry dropping (but still having a good deal of a ways to go, IMO) with the development of more tools on Linux but Linux isn't there yet until Joe Shmoe can throw together a toy app quickly and easily that can keep track of his beer, cigarette, and pork rind expenditures.
Re:This really is not news (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Makes you wonder.... (Score:5, Informative)
The penalty for abusing GPLd code is not the compulsory re-licensing of everything. If you're in breach of the terms of the GPL license, then you're breaking copyright law. Nothing makes their proprietary code suddenly open, unless they decide to comply with the GPL rather than fight/settle/re-code.
an analyst who doesn't really know (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Difference: Linux developers are cream of the c (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Social not Technical (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Not new (Score:3, Informative)
The earliest versions of Win NT kept the GUI code out of the kernel, but that was changed in later versions of NT to improve performance. Bear in mind that NT was much more of a resource hog than OS/2.
More importantly is the corporate culture - M$ has played fast and loose with programming in the past, e.g. the original IBM PC and their first software for the Mac.
IBM PC - Intel's databooks for the 8086 specifically stated that interrupts below 20H were reserved for future versions of the 8086 family - IBM and M$ then proceed to use those interrupts for the BIOS routines.
Mac - Apple had many programming guidelines that were intended to allow migration to future versions of the 68000 family (e.g. don't use the upper 8 bits of addressing for flags). When Apple came out with a 68020 version of the Mac, a lot of the M$ software was broken by the upgrade.
Re:Only a matter of time (Score:5, Informative)
They already do shared source for their "partners". I got to see some Windows code when I was trying (and eventually failing) to write a driver.
And don't forget that you can see the source code of Windows CE if you want to.
Re:Audit of Microsoft's codebase? (Score:3, Informative)
2) POSIX subsystem compilance was never very advanced, so obviously not much being pulled from there
3) Certainly the file systems are very different
4) The header files aren't even close in the headers that are common between the two
Recognize this directory tree?
http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/info/xpsrctre
Didn't think so. (Means very little however.)
Socket implementation is different, threading model is different, task scheduling is different...
So while there could be plagarism, it would not be without so much effort that you may was well just write the stuff yourself, after being inspired and pointed in the right direction by the GPL'ed code.
Re:This really is not news (Score:2, Informative)
Just adding noise to the discussion.
Two Words... Eclipse..... IBM..... (Score:3, Informative)
Microsoft wanted it easy for developers to get its tools. They were never free, however. Eclipse is free. But IBM's version (Websphere AppDev) for the enterprise is basically Eclipse, with additional plugins.
I can run Eclipse on Linuz, etc. Same engine. IBM is or has overaken WebLogic in the AppServer market.
----
The idea that MS wants a better OS, so it's looking at Linux is an understatement. Basically, now its... "Okay, we bodged up our OS to justify violating Monopoly laws. Now that we've won.... We just need to undo the code intermingling of End User Applications with the kernel."
Eclipse is the next "killer" app, by going back to the fundamentals of how to build a huge software business.
Re:Difference: Linux developers are cream of the c (Score:2, Informative)
Short story in semi-point form. No names, lest people I know lose jobs. Car accident, patient in intensive care unit. Young woman, has small children, I believe. ICU doctors want to pull the plug (think it was a neurologist, ie, brain surgeon). No brain scan completed, doctor makes recommendation to family to turn off ventilator, family approves.
Nurse mentions to doctor that patient appears to be responding, and the doctor should get a scan to measure brain activity. She is overridden by the doctor, who maintains that the patient is brain dead, a vegetable. Doctor orders that patient is to be removed from life support. Nurse decides to adminster medication to assist breathing based on a standing order (blanket prescription for the ICU),and then turns off life support as ordered bvy doctor. Only because of medication administered, patient continues to breath. Nurse nearly loses job over this.
A few days later, patient is awake. A few months later, patient is nearly fully recovered, possible loss of recent memories, but is up walking about, part of her family, leading a useful and productive life. As far as I'm concerned, the above doctor should not be practicing, and should be sued for everything he owns, but doctors protect their own.
I don't trust doctors anymore. Period. You should get to know some ICU nurses, and you might want to revise some of your opinions. Personally, I would cause severe physical harm to any doctor with a god complex, before I would let them touch anyone I care about. I would also ask an experienced third party nurse to do an assessment, review a brain scan, and provide a second opinion (insamuch as the law permits nurses to have an opinion), before I would pull the plug on anyone based on a doctors advice.
Re:This is a perfect example of (Score:3, Informative)
At the very least, give the mod points out and then have it so people can not get more mod points until they have used the ones they have. I think then people will get moderated in a way that will reflect the quality of a comment.
Re:More Power To Them (Score:2, Informative)
Finally, you need to take a course on how to properly compile the source since it is seriously MASSIVE (spans several CDs, rememeber not just a kernel, but a web browser, cd-burner, all bundled applications, etc...it's BIG).
just some food for thought, the source is available, but if you do anything not approved by MS while in possesion of it, you are pretty much screwed.
proxy