Switch From Windows to Linux

Really? This needs to be explained that the most used Desktop OS in existence is Microsoft Windows, all versions. Most major industries run on Windows as well as most government institutions and medical fields. Not only does Microsoft have complete skin in the game but so does the industry at large. Pretty straight forward, if you think about it.

And they'll still be able to no matter what the kernel and file system... :rolleyes:
 
Edge is just Chrome now so I don't see how that's a big deal or anything special. I doubt they would have ported it if they were sticking with their original implementation.

That is the point.... they have been converting all their software packages. I would say their web browser is a pretty major part of that plan. MS has spent the last couple years fixing their spaghetti OS code. Getting it on their internal git hub, spinning as much out into objects as possible and converting everything of their own to WinRT. WinRT I tell you right now MS already has running on Linux. You think those Linux servers running the MS cloud are running completely independent code. MS has been getting everything ready to be easily switched.
 
And once again the introduction of this comment contradicts the ending. C'mon man, the NT kernel is old as shit, Microsoft are showing all the signs regarding a distinct lack of interest, and the NTFS file system is one of the main reasons the Windows update process is so intrusive.

I guess I just have a greater awareness of the world around me, I accept reality.

Holy cow, trying to twist things to say what they are not saying. What is said is that the Linux Kernel will never be the foundation of the Windows Operating System, not know, not ever. That is a highly basic understanding without any contradiction at all. The ability to think with the blinders off.......
 
Holy cow, trying to twist things to say what they are not saying. What is said is that the Linux Kernel will never be the foundation of the Windows Operating System, not know, not ever. That is a highly basic understanding without any contradiction at all. The ability to think with the blinders off.......

And I honestly wouldn't expect you to say anything different. Hence the reason your opinion is fairly meaningless.
 
Windows is completely incompatible with the Linux Kernel, try to keep things in context.

You are incorrect. Anything coded using WinRT can be compiled to run on just about anything... and the MS developer behind WinRT is now building out their new xlang compiler. Which when it is completed will easily cross platform recompile any WinRT program.

MS is getting ready to strike win32 dead... even the biggest MS booster that thinks I'm nuts knows MS has been trying there hardest to kill Win32 for years now.
 
Plays Detroit: Become Human no problems under Linux, screw you Tim Sweeney!

Windows is completely incompatible with the Linux Kernel, simple as that. Playing a game through hacks and such, as good as it may run, does not negate the fact that Windows is completely incompatible with the Linux kernel. There is not purpose and thinking otherwise and so far, no proof otherwise, either.
 
You are incorrect. Anything coded using WinRT can be compiled to run on just about anything... and the MS developer behind WinRT is now building out their new xlang compiler. Which when it is completed will easily cross platform recompile any WinRT program.

MS is getting ready to strike win32 dead... even the biggest MS booster that thinks I'm nuts knows MS has been trying there hardest to kill Win32 for years now.

And WinRT failed, hard, because Windows software does not work on it, among many other reasons. Also, WinRT still used the NT Kernel, regardless and not the Linux Kernel. Edit: Also, Win32 is going nowhere and will not be for a very long time. The industry is the lead on what Windows can and cannot do, and it is straight forward as that.

Being in retail and corporate environments is beneficial to a complete perspective.
 
And I honestly wouldn't expect you to say anything different. Hence the reason your opinion is fairly meaningless.

A persons opinion is fairly meaningless to someone who has a different perspective does not change what is and what will be. The experience and perspective of what Windows is and what Linux is helpful when seeing things from a foundational level.
 
Windows is completely incompatible with the Linux Kernel, simple as that. Playing a game through hacks and such, as good as it may run, does not negate the fact that Windows is completely incompatible with the Linux kernel. There is not purpose and thinking otherwise and so far, no proof otherwise, either.

No one's disputing the NT kernel is incompatible with the Linux kernel, naturally it is. The problem is, userland should not be accessing the kernel directly. There is a DLL layer that takes care of that, hence Wine.
 
A persons opinion is fairly meaningless to someone who has a different perspective does not change what is and what will be. The experience and perspective of what Windows is and what Linux is helpful when seeing things from a foundational level.

I'll leave the interpretation of this quote and it's obvious hypocrisy up to other members of the [H] Forums.
 
No one's disputing the NT kernel is incompatible with the Linux kernel, naturally it is. The problem is, userland should not be accessing the kernel directly. There is a DLL layer that takes care of that, hence Wine.

What was said is Windows is completely incompatible with Linux kernel and the Linux kernel will never be the foundation of Windows.
 
All the while MS will be able to leech off the Linux community for all the OS and filesystem needs while contributing a bit of their own stuff just to make sure their own software works well.

That is the power of Linux and why it wins long term. There is ZERO chance of basically any major OS kernel being around in any major way in 20 years from now... and I think I'm betting its more like 5 years or so as I do believe MS will kill their kernel in the next couple.

Distributed file system work done by Google... benefits Amazon. Work done on flash file systems by Samsung benefits Google. Work done on faster display tech by Nvidia benefits Intel. Work done on network subsystems by Intel benefits Broadcom. And on and on and on.

MS can't compete with that forever. They are inviting Google and their ChromeOS to replace them for good if they try and one man band it forever. The problem for MS is more and more tech companies be they Tesla and SpaceX or some VIA and the Chinese ect ect pour more and more support in every year. Last year 1,400 companies contributed to the Linux kernel... almost 16 thousand developers working for them. Those numbers have went up a min of 10% for 10 years straight now. That is just the kernel itself... never mind the companies working on file systems, networking, backends and all the other piping. At the rate of Linux development expansion MS is going to have a harder and harder time competing. They really are one of two companies paddling upstream... but in Apples case they open source a lot of things like CUPS early and gotten a lot of that sweet sweet free FOSS development.
 
And WinRT failed, hard, because Windows software does not work on it, among many other reasons. Also, WinRT still used the NT Kernel, regardless and not the Linux Kernel. Edit: Also, Win32 is going nowhere and will not be for a very long time. The industry is the lead on what Windows can and cannot do, and it is straight forward as that.

Being in retail and corporate environments is beneficial to a complete perspective.

Right MS didn't FORCE its adoption. I agree. (not that it was aimed at replacing all desktops)

RT isn't really a great comparison its not the same thing. But if there was no option to run win32 it wouldn't have failed. If MS stops selling versions of windows that run win32 it will die fast.

Mark my words... book mark this post. In the next 2-3 years MS will announced a Windows 11 (or they will call it something more interesting) and they WILL be killing Win32.... or at the most offering a wine like layer to run that software while suggesting developers dump support. Very much what Apple did when they killed Apple power. We already have open source projects that run 99% of windows software just fine... games don't count cause there developers are stupid. Desktop software in general just works as long as it doesn't have some silly DRM module that tried to hook deep into the OS.

Do you not think MS could not write a better verison of Wine... in a couple months ? Sure they could... they know exactly what their APIs do. lol
 
Holy cow, trying to twist things to say what they are not saying. What is said is that the Linux Kernel will never be the foundation of the Windows Operating System, not know, not ever. That is a highly basic understanding without any contradiction at all. The ability to think with the blinders off.......

Again, you simply don't understand. It's true that the Linux kernel will never run a Microsoft OS because MS will drop out of the OS business. It will be nothing more than a "Windows" distro of Linux with the DE which mimics the Windows UI.

All Microsoft has to do is spend a little time and resource to improve upon Wine and most backwards compatibility with current Windows software will be taken care of. For the most part, Microsoft probably doesn't need to do a whole lot more than allow Wine to use actual Windows DLLs instead of the written from scratch ones it has now.

You simply don't realize how easy it actually is for Microsoft to swap over. Ten or more years ago it would have been a massive undertaking but that isn't the case now.
 
Hello horse, have you been introduced to water?

Yep, basically, I see no reason to switch. Using both for their own strengths are what it is all about as well as using Mac OS, although I personally do not have a Mac computer. (I love building my computers and have an extensive, but not all knowing, practical knowledge that I enjoy having learned.) If I find that Linux is what is to be used on a personal computer at home, that is what will be done.
 
Again, you simply don't understand. It's true that the Linux kernel will never run a Microsoft OS because MS will drop out of the OS business.

No, Microsoft is not dropping out of the OS business, not now and probably not ever, although there is no way to predict who will be around in 30 or more years or even what will be used at that point. The perspective of direct experience in the retail and corporate sectors is most definitely beneficial.
 
Again, you simply don't understand. It's true that the Linux kernel will never run a Microsoft OS because MS will drop out of the OS business. It will be nothing more than a "Windows" distro of Linux with the DE which mimics the Windows UI.

All Microsoft has to do is spend a little time and resource to improve upon Wine and most backwards compatibility with current Windows software will be taken care of. For the most part, Microsoft probably doesn't need to do a whole lot more than allow Wine to use actual Windows DLLs instead of the written from scratch ones it has now.

You simply don't realize how easy it actually is for Microsoft to swap over. Ten or more years ago it would have been a massive undertaking but that isn't the case now.

Good point on wine... nothing stopping MS from basically bundling all of windows .dll files for wine to use. I'm sure they could pour over the code for a few months and have it working as well as the current MS comparability layer.
 
Good point on wine... nothing stopping MS from basically bundling all of windows .dll files for wine to use. I'm sure they could pour over the code for a few months and have it working as well as the current MS comparability layer.

This is why I said earlier that well over half the work has already been done by others. The Wine project has been evolving for years now with little in the way of resources and most of the work is already done. Look what happened when Valve put some money and resources behind Wine in the form of Proton. It was a massive leap in compatibility and performance for many games and Valve is still under the same limitations as Wine. With some Microsoft engineers helping the project with support in the way of tools and MS software the project has been denied this whole time I would expect orders of magnitude improvement in a very short time.

It will soon be the best time for MS to drop the OS portion of the business and swap over. All the indicators are there for it to happen and most of the tools are in place. Really, the only thing holding it back now is Microsoft's need to port over the portions of their software they plan to sell in the future which will need to be run native.
 
Why do I feel like I just jumped on a merry go round?

The merry go rounds can make people sick, it is known. :) What was said and was claimed to have been said are not the same thing. Thankfully, Windows is going no where and the switch is not needed, especially when both can be used entirely on their own merits.
 
The merry go rounds can make people sick, it is known. :) What was said and was claimed to have been said are not the same thing. Thankfully, Windows is going no where and the switch is not needed, especially when both can be used entirely on their own merits.

No one said Windows was going anywhere. I think you need to read a book on how operating systems work?
 
This is why I said earlier that well over half the work has already been done by others. The Wine project has been evolving for years now with little in the way of resources and most of the work is already done. Look what happened when Valve put some money and resources behind Wine in the form of Proton. It was a massive leap in compatibility and performance for many games and Valve is still under the same limitations as Wine. With some Microsoft engineers helping the project with support in the way of tools and MS software the project has been denied this whole time I would expect orders of magnitude improvement in a very short time.

It will soon be the best time for MS to drop the OS portion of the business and swap over. All the indicators are there for it to happen and most of the tools are in place. Really, the only thing holding it back now is Microsoft's need to port over the portions of their software they plan to sell in the future which will need to be run native.

They are already on it. I believe most of MS own software is C++/WinRT at this point... and they have Kerr now working on a cross platform compiler that will basically take anything programmed for WinRT UWP and compile native for Windows kernel Linux kernel and even UNIX. So the same code can be used to sell software on Apple Google and MS with a simple recompile. (if all goes well)

I think the main hurdles for MS have sorting their legacy Windows Spaghetti code. The move to GIT hub should have really helped there. I have a feeling that is what is behind a lot of the MIT licencing of individual windows bits the last 6 months. I think as they clean them up they are open sourcing them which helps them clean them up a bit more. I expect a lot more windows bits will be released as MIT licence throughout 2020... and by 2021/22 I would expect them to move to start replacing the kernel. Even if its a windows server release first or something. Moving windows server to the kernel would make a ton of sense... giving MS complete fail on the file system front. Windows server is not in a good position long term. If windows server goes first windows desktop won't be far behind.
 
They are already on it. I believe most of MS own software is C++/WinRT at this point... and they have Kerr now working on a cross platform compiler that will basically take anything programmed for WinRT UWP and compile native for Windows kernel Linux kernel and even UNIX. So the same code can be used to sell software on Apple Google and MS with a simple recompile. (if all goes well)

I think the main hurdles for MS have sorting their legacy Windows Spaghetti code. The move to GIT hub should have really helped there. I have a feeling that is what is behind a lot of the MIT licencing of individual windows bits the last 6 months. I think as they clean them up they are open sourcing them which helps them clean them up a bit more. I expect a lot more windows bits will be released as MIT licence throughout 2020... and by 2021/22 I would expect them to move to start replacing the kernel. Even if its a windows server release first or something. Moving windows server to the kernel would make a ton of sense... giving MS complete fail on the file system front. Windows server is not in a good position long term. If windows server goes first windows desktop won't be far behind.

The idea of increased unity at OS level is actually quite exciting, computing should never have been a locked down walled garden. People can still make good money out of proprietary software, it just makes sense for the OS itself to be more open.

I remember when walled gardens didn't exist, it was Steve Jobs that created the walled garden and Bill Gates worked for Steve Jobs before starting Microsoft.
 
Last edited:
I remember when walled gardens didn't exist, it was Steve Jobs that created the walled garden and Bill Gates worked for Steve Jobs before starting Microsoft.

Many early commercial OSes were “walled gardens” and Gates never worked for Jobs. Gates, and other MS founders, worked with MITS when they formed Microsoft and during that time Gates was a student at Harvard.
 
I think it's probably true that the NT kernel is coming to end of life and I can't help notice how much microsoft is working to integrate aspects of linux and linux compatibility. The truth is I cannot tell if it's because ARM is gaining ground and probably the future or because they want to be in the service business more than the OS business. Probably some combination of the two.
 
A lot of big enterprise customers have moving to FOSS in industries that have been buying closed source software for decades. MS is just moving in the same direction
 
A lot of big enterprise customers have moving to FOSS in industries that have been buying closed source software for decades. MS is just moving in the same direction

Very few have overall, in the big scheme of things. In fact, I would hazard a guess to say it is in the single digit percentages overall. I have yet to see FOSS operating systems in any major industry I have worked in.
 
No one said Windows was going anywhere. I think you need to read a book on how operating systems work?

If the kernel would ever to be replaced with the Linux Kernel, that would be the immediate death knell of the Windows Operating System, completely. Changing the kernel means completely breaking everything about Windows and nothing would work anymore. SEC is not going to allow that.
 
I think it's probably true that the NT kernel is coming to end of life and I can't help notice how much microsoft is working to integrate aspects of linux and linux compatibility. The truth is I cannot tell if it's because ARM is gaining ground and probably the future or because they want to be in the service business more than the OS business. Probably some combination of the two.

I see no reason for the NT kernel to be end of life at all. All they have to do is take the NT kernel from the Server space and implement it into their desktop OS or at least the improvements for anything above 16 cores.
 
Very few have overall, in the big scheme of things. In fact, I would hazard a guess to say it is in the single digit percentages overall. I have yet to see FOSS operating systems in any major industry I have worked in.

Have you worked no where with servers ? Or no where that uses cloud based stuff. In 2019 even MS admitted on Azure Linux outnumbered windows server installs.
 
The idea of increased unity at OS level is actually quite exciting, computing should never have been a locked down walled garden. People can still make good money out of proprietary software, it just makes sense for the OS itself to be more open.

I remember when walled gardens didn't exist, it was Steve Jobs that created the walled garden and Bill Gates worked for Steve Jobs before starting Microsoft.

Many early commercial OSes were “walled gardens” and Gates never worked for Jobs. Gates, and other MS founders, worked with MITS when they formed Microsoft and during that time Gates was a student at Harvard.

What Derangel said above.
 
Have you worked no where with servers ? Or no where that uses cloud based stuff. In 2019 even MS admitted on Azure Linux outnumbered windows server installs.

Even internal servers are predominately Windows based servers. Cloud based is not relevant to the discussion as far as the kernel thing goes and what happens internally. Also, show proof of what you mean by outnumbered and show me that these networks were active directory based. Also, show me industries that have highly secured systems that can simple host things on the cloud?
 
If the kernel would ever to be replaced with the Linux Kernel, that would be the immediate death knell of the Windows Operating System, completely. Changing the kernel means completely breaking everything about Windows and nothing would work anymore. SEC is not going to allow that.

No it wouldn't as userland software should not be reliant on direct syscalls to the kernel, where direct syscalls are used it's with very limited privileges - This is what the DLL translation layer is there for, this is the point you keep missing. Here's a link from the Wine developers highlighting how the NT kernel works:

https://wiki.winehq.org/Wine_Developer's_Guide/Architecture_Overview

uRRiNE4.png


Red highlights the .DLL translation layer present under Windows, Green highlights the kernel. As you can see, there's a number of layers between the application .EXE and the kernel.

Even internal servers are predominately Windows based servers. Cloud based is not relevant to the discussion as far as the kernel thing goes and what happens internally. Also, show proof of what you mean by outnumbered and show me that these networks were active directory based. Also, show me industries that have highly secured systems that can simple host things on the cloud?

Only in situations controlling AD or regarding specialized software (a situation that is being shifted into the cloud where Linux is most predominant), where performance and security are concerned, Linux reigns supreme. Linux can manage AD duties, but sadly this isn't taught in universities - Most likely MS themselves have something to do with this.

Essentially, Linux protects the delicate Windows servers. If this isn't the case we're talking small business which is nothing like corperate IT. All small business should have shifted to the cloud by now as the idea of a single dusty server for AD, DC, DNS and sometimes Exchange duties is a single concentrated source of massive network failure and so 2003.
I see no reason for the NT kernel to be end of life at all. All they have to do is take the NT kernel from the Server space and implement it into their desktop OS or at least the improvements for anything above 16 cores.

I see plenty of reason, and your example of 16 cores is a perfect example of this. There are a number of cases where Linux holds as much as a 50% performance improvement over Windows in heavily threaded workloads, a situation that still hasn't been resolved with the latest builds of Windows - Most likely because to do so would break other aspects of the NT kernel/scheduler. NUMA under Windows is hopeless.

https://www.techspot.com/review/1683-linux-vs-windows-threadripper-vs-core-i9/
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
Even internal servers are predominately Windows based servers. Cloud based is not relevant to the discussion as far as the kernel thing goes and what happens internally. Also, show proof of what you mean by outnumbered and show me that these networks were active directory based. Also, show me industries that have highly secured systems that can simple host things on the cloud?

https://www.zdnet.com/article/micro...s-now-more-used-on-azure-than-windows-server/

I think you might be smoking something. lol

https://www.redhat.com/en/success-stories
https://www.suse.com/c/success/

Canonical is also doing pretty well with Ubuntu server. Never mind their more custom stuff like their 5G NFV platform... which is in use by AT&T, Bell, Deutsche Tele, Sky and others. Ubuntu financial platform is used by Bloomberg, PayPal, AllanGrey and many others... although I think Red hat still rules that market. Every super computer in the world runs Linux. 97% of all webservers are running Linux.

I'm not saying MS isn't selling windows server still... its just dying. Its a fact. There is a reason MS stopped reporting server sales in the Quarterly reports. (its now rolled into cloud sales). I believe last quarter they claimed the server business went up 2% of course that was lost in the 67% bump they claimed for Azure that quarter. There server group is making lots of money but all the growth seems to be their Linux running... and majority Linux installing Azure users. With the growth of Linux on Azure... read the article. I would say 2020 is probably the year where MS will start making more off Linux then widnows server in the server space.
 
Last edited:
Even internal servers are predominately Windows based servers. Cloud based is not relevant to the discussion as far as the kernel thing goes and what happens internally. Also, show proof of what you mean by outnumbered and show me that these networks were active directory based. Also, show me industries that have highly secured systems that can simple host things on the cloud?

With all due respect your knowledge seems a bit dated.

The finance industry is all over cloud solutions and has been for awhile. Hardly anything important is hosted internally because of the cost difference

Capital One is just one example and they've been very public about it.

Just because things aren't changing in your home office doesn't mean they won't ever so enough of the bret hart references and enlighten yourself
 
Maybe for the average user that is just going to turn on their PC and open Chrome, sure. But then wouldn't they just buy a Chromebook? My problem for decades now with Linux is kind of the contrary to how most Distros and Open Source software works, it's so fragmented that nothing seems "done". Yeah, I can find an app that does what I want but it's half ass complete because the developers parted ways / differing opinions / can't agree on color of the sky, so each of them fork the product into different directions that gets forked by some a-hole that wants the background to be orange and now we have 5 applications that are all the same only slightly different and none are finished. The Open Source movement was supposed to bring collaboration together and foster creative thinking. Instead it's just turned into a fragmented mess of opinions. Even a distro can't get it's shit together. The basis of the operating system. "Well I don't like that it doesn't run KDE, so fuck you guys I'm making another distro using the same core but with KDE and the shit I want on it". Good for you.

Just make something feel complete, for the love of all things holy.
Yeah the open source movement is it’s own biggest enemy.
 
Back
Top