NYT on why Microsoft should rewrite Windows from scratch

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/29/technology/29digi.html?ref=technology

8 14 18 years ago

aston• 18 years ago

Aston on why the NYT should read the mythical man month ...

Also, microkernels aren't the end-all-be-all of OS design. And Singularity is more about a managed-code kernel than a microkernel.

Feynman• 18 years ago

Hmmm, the article starts off with "Windows seems to move an inch for every time that Mac OS X or Linux laps it." Then moves to "A MONOLITHIC operating system like Windows perpetuates an obsolete design."

I'm no OS expert, but I thought Linux was also "monolithic" in terms of kernel design.

I think Mr. Stross should keep to writing about subjects in his expertise.

silverlake• 18 years ago

Yes, Linux is monolithic. MacOS X is a micro-kernel, but I believe the BSD stuff runs in kernel space, so it's effectively a monolithic kernel with a nice layered design. I think NT is somewhere between OS X and Linux. The article was terrible.

soundsop• 18 years ago

An engineering argument written by a businessperson using evidence from Gartner analysts. Nuff said.

mattmaroon• 18 years ago

Yeah, it's pretty easy to see why MS ignores them. At the same time, even though the methodology is flawed, the conclusion seems pretty accurate. It's time for MS to rewrite from scratch.

arockwell• 18 years ago

Yeah, I agree. Not to mention, wasn't vista technically considered a rewrite? A rewrite does not have to break backwards compatibility.

jeroen• 18 years ago

"The internal code name for the next version is “Windows 7.” The “7” refers to nothing in particular, a company spokeswoman says."

Uhh, how about NT4, 2000, Vista, 7?

Anyway, I thought we all agreed that the Mozilla rewrite wasn't a great plan. Why would it be any better for Windows? What' wrong with refactoring?

allenbrunson3• 18 years ago

a more relevant analogy is apple's mac-to-macosx switch. they completely dumped the old os and replaced it with a new one, relegating the old one to a poorly-integrated emulator.

it was very painful. the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the old guard was loud and angry. but it was good for the company in the long run. now the old macos emulator is all but gone, as are the complaints. it was short-term painful, but a long-term gigantic win.

the same would be true for windows, if it were rewritten from scratch. it's not that the code itself needs a rewrite, it's that the windows api is a patch on a bag on a pile of spit. the fact that microsoft has put such a high priority on backward compatibility is slowly strangling windows to death.

ahold• 18 years ago

Microsoft should write the next Windows based on Unix finally. They could use UNIX from their big friends at SCO :))

mynameishere• 18 years ago

NT is solid. They just have it loaded down with cruft.

Vista is the equivalent, at a minimum, of Windows version 12 — preceded by 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, NT, 95, NT 4.0, 98, 2000, ME, XP

Wow, what ignorance. NT and the earlier Windows version are unrelated.

allenbrunson3• 18 years ago

they are not unrelated in the sense that the NT series includes a lot of APIs from earlier Windows versions, which increases the cruft level.

ericb• 18 years ago

If you thought vista was late... oh the joys of The Big Rewrite...

allenbrunson3• 18 years ago

dupe:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=231411

and my version only got three votes. people preferred the "rewrite from scratch" title, perhaps?

rplevy• 18 years ago

Forget rewriting, they should open the source. That's just about the only thing they could do that would make their operating system interesting to me. I don't know much about business, but it also might be just the shark they would need to jump in order to reverse their gradual decline.

NYT on why Microsoft should rewrite Windows from scratch

Related Stories