MS Unix
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Abe Oct 20, 2005 9:44 AM EDT |
Watch out, Steve wants to build his own Unix. What is the matter Stevie, windows is not good enough any more? Can't compete when you have to. The only way MS can build its own Unix is by stealing Linux. No wonder why they are hiring all sorts of Open Source developers. That is OK Stevie, just remember that we have a head start and you need to catch up first. And by the time you release, Linux will be all over and for a lot less cost still. It is a smart move Stevie, I give you that. But at least, it will be level field and competition will be fierce. I am not sure you can sustain the beating. Talking about clustering, who is it you are planning to purchase this time. It does not make it difference now since all this is still vaporware. When you have concrete products, then, and only then it would be worth discussing. Then comes court time. The trouble is, who is going to have the money to sue and stay in court long enough to exhaust MS bank? It is an issue for sure. |
| Kagehi Oct 20, 2005 11:27 AM EDT |
Anyone seen the news code for Vista? Since they had to sink the SS Longhorn in the bay of software development because it was looking like a scrap metal sculpture, one has to wonder how much of a rewrite they did to get Vista they stole from someplace else... ;) |
| tadelste Oct 20, 2005 1:23 PM EDT |
I've seen the product not the code. No /usr/src/windows/lib/modules/build or whatever. The interface is OS X - almost. And Looking Glass - almost. You have to figure that the TCP/IP stack is FreeBSD. That's whay they use. The rest is probably Linux ;) They won't have to pay $70,000 to some hacker this time. |
| jimf Oct 20, 2005 2:05 PM EDT |
So then asuming MS will be using open source, and the best they can hope for is to be a OSX clone, or, Linspire on steriods (they wish), or, maybe just a wannabe/also ran. Really, the only advantage that will remain is their service infrastructure..... LOLROF |
| helios Oct 21, 2005 7:26 AM EDT |
More people than just me pegged Microsoft's "Linux Lab" for more than a way to "understand" Linux. Many of us have said from the beginning this "lab" was nothing more than a safe, stable place where MS could probe Linux for weaknesses. A natural bi-product of their research of course is the ability to incorporate Linux technology into their own failing products. VistaLinux indeed. |
| tadelste Oct 21, 2005 7:43 AM EDT |
helios: You're on the right track from what I'm able to determine at the moment. I spent some time on a conference call yesterday discussing this very subject. A large government agency develops in Linux, using Linux for their backend 100%, writes web service apps in Linux with PHP, MySQL, Postgresql, etc. But they just rolled out Windows XP and Office 2003 for their desktop. This is fairly common and they didn't know about Red Hat's Satellite, etc. In the discussion they were having buyers remorse about the Windows rollout, mostly concerned about Vista. This was fairly enlightening because Microsoft has WinFS, the VIsta Gui, much of the open source software they used without attribution from the BSD project. From what I gathered, they are writing a new kernel, separating the user interface from the kernel, adding a layer between the desktop API's, user space and the kernel. Their security model looks like Linux with everything tightened down. I still have some questions. Will they drop NetBIOS and UDP and name services in favor of sockets? Will they shut everything down except when one adds a service? Will NAT, etc. become part of the kernel instead of an addon? They still plan a 2006 release and that could mean XP gets buried with no reactivation forcing their installed base to make a choice. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!