Slashdot Mirror

Lets forget about the jokes. And instead lets try to imagine, what Microsoft Linux would really be like, if it was ever released.

I'm pretty sure it would include patches to the kernel, and they might even play by the rules and release the source for those. But there might very well be some closed source kernel modules as well. In addition you will not be allowed to copy those kernel modules. We can start guessing about what modules there will be. But I'm pretty sure one of them would be an ntfs driver.

Microsoft could get their usual GUI to run on top of Linux. Since others have done most of it, Microsoft could do it as well. The exact details about how Microsoft would do it are not easy to guess. They could use parts of Wine, but maybe, Microsoft want to do it another way. If they are going to use Wine, they could either use the latest version, or the last non GPL version.

But Microsoft could take a completely different route and not use any Wine code at all, instead they could use as much of the existing Windows code as possible. I wonder if this would be best done in a library or a kernel module. Probably they would like a real binfmt_exe.o kernel module with its own personality. It is probably going to map some large DLLs into the process address space, and maybe even some shared memory.

I believe programs written for Windows when running on this Microsoft Linux will have access to some NTFS features, that are not easilly accesible by normal Linux programs. It could be done either by the closed source library knowing about some secret ioctl implemented by msntfs.o, or by cooperation between msntfs.o and binfmt_exe.o. Possibly a combination; an ioctl, which is not only secret, but also only allowed to programs running with the exe personality.

I wonder what graphics drivers are going to look like. I guess they will probably ship with closed source kernel modules implementing drivers for various graphics chips. But of course they are probably going to be incompatible with XFree86. And might even prevent the ones needed for XFree86 from being loaded at the same time.

It's already been released!

http://www.mslinux.org/

They must be using MS Linux.

CB

Is a Microsoft flavor of Linux coming?

It sure is. It's scheduled to be out in November:

Microsoft Linux - the premier linux distro

MS Linux

Thank you for the useful link to this page detailing Microsoft's operating systems. Without your help I would be left wondering: "What operating systems does this Microsoft company make? Do they make the Lunix?

I also appreciate the effort. I was unaware the MS does in fact make the Lunix.

I'm visualizing 10 robots sitting at a conference table, while the whole board of directors is sitting at home, naked, drinking their morning coffee, etc.

This does sort of imply that (a) social greeting has gotten out of hand, and (b) that we should consider the Japanese shallow bow instead of the handshake. More sanitary, quicker, less fatiguing.

Dang it, you are correct. This means that prices for Microsoft Linux will rise. I'll have to revise my bugets. Damn you SCO!!!

One moment, they already have that: MS Linux

I don't agree. OS X is based on a BSD kernel (a modified version of 4.4-LITE, iirc). This means that technically, OS X isn't UNIX per-se; it is BSD. Hence, let us look at BSD. It was created at Berkeley as one of many UNIX-like derivatives. It's _NOT_ UNIX, as they had to take out all of AT&T's proprietary UNIX code and come up with their own equivalent code (iirc, once again). Now let's go back to OS X: since it is based on BSD, it would only be [a] UNIX if BSD is [a] UNIX, since it is directly BSD, and not directly UNIX per-se. HOWEVER, BSD plain and simply _is_not_ UNIX. Therefore, since OS X is based on BSD, which is not [a] UNIX, then OS X is by definition not [a] UNIX.

If that doesn't convince you, we can also look at the alternative argument that Apple still needs to be certified in order to use the trademark "UNIX." Sun and IBM both do, with Solaris and HP-UX, iirc. To say that "OS X probably qualifies as a UNIX; at least as much as, say, Solaris does" is very subjective; it might be true technologically (I doubt it, but that's my own subjective opinion), but it certainly isn't true, as far as being certified goes.

Bottom line, I feel that Apple is asking for a little bit too much here. It really isn't like they're asking for very much money, nor are they going about this in a distasteful fashion (*cough* SCO *cough*). The Open Group is being pretty fair about it, imho (well, as far as corporations can be). Plus, if Apple were to win, GNU would henceforth be known as GIU (GIU Is Unix), not to mention every other OS out there. (GIU/Debian? Zeta UNIX? BSD UNIX? Linux UNIX? Oh, here's a good one... Microsoft UNIX! --hey, they have a command prompt, that counts don't it??)

All sarcasm aside, I don't personally feel Apple has a strong case, much less _tons_ of money. I forsee them losing more money in the court battles than in just licensing it (for even a decade), if they haven't already. But please, let me know if I'm wrong on any of my "facts."

Wrong link... Try MSLinux.org

Try here: MicroSoft Linux

You might laugh, but what's even more obvious?

Could M$ be secretly developing their own Linux distro? All they would have to do is close any software that would interact with Windoze and they would wrap up the whole Linux business market...

Could this be far from the truth? This would certainly seem to lend some credibility to the theory...

Just wait for their next killer release.

For those of you who haven't already heard: Microsoft's Linux distro

More likely: Microsoft Linux Distribution

http://www.mslinux.org/

This is where you need to go to get your Linux Desktop Replacement!

Regards,

Joel

--
Boys, Keep It Wrinkled...

The future of Microsoft.

ah, but there is, you ignorant linux user.

Slashdot requires you to wait 20 seconds between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.

begin sarcasm;
Hey, MS is releasing a version of linux soon too. Check out their website..
MS Linux
end sarcasm;

Not to worry my friend. Pretty soon you will be able to download mslinux from mslinux.org
:-)

mslinux.org

*grin*

Hey, what are you talking about?

Microsoft has already started developing its own version of Linux (MS. Linux)

For details, please visit MS Linux

know how to install Java.

Microsoft was shipping MSVM which would try (and most often fail) to run Java code that in came in contact with. This caused users to think that the program was to blame or that Java sucked.

If Microsoft included Linux with every copy of windows it would hurt better distrobutions. Normally this would just be looked down up, but because M$ is a monopoly they are covered by special laws to prevent them from killing off helpless competitors in new markets. They are supposed to help prevent M$ from forcing Coca Cola and Pepsi(bleck) out of the soft drink market. Rather than do such an obvious takeover, M$ is tried to "inch foreward" into the virtual machine market.

SEE!

-ted

But Microsoft already has it's own linux distribution ready slated for release in november 2003. Knowing MS and it's slipping OS release dates this will probably end up being released in 2004.

You already have one :-D

You can get it here.

You mean like like here?

Hell Yeah! Lindows will die because it will be replaced by (guess what) Microsoft Linux.

ph33r M$!

I think they are releasing the source to their new operating system. Its just to bad that it won't be avalible for another year.

MS already have a Linux distro out. Check out www.mslinux.org for details.

Enjoy :-)

1) A MS Distro with proprietary libraries and a proprietary office product

Oh, you mean something like this, perhaps? :P

Maybe they're about to release MSLINUX.

Then I guess that this is no longer a spoof?!

Haven't you heard the news?

MS Linux could be a better idea!

I wonder what will happen when Microsoft comes out with it's own distro later this year. See http://www.mslinux.org LOL

It doesn't take that much effort to fool people.

I took a call from a customer who got Windows with his pc and wanted a refund because he was going to use linux.... (i think he's smart)

While we're talking about my recent install of xfree86 4.2.0 he mentions MS is taking over linux now with MS Linux and belives it's real. (i realize he's dumb)

I spent the required time to guide him to the domain whois to show him this page isn't owned by Microsoft. He thought the quotes on the page are real....

sigh, anyway it's not hard to fool people

Well, I think I'm going to hold out for November when mslinux is supposed to ship. If the web site can be believed, it looks like it will run circles around RH, Debian, Suse, and Mandrake. ;-)

Obviously, if they don't get their act together, they will have to push on their MS Linux Project

Check it out here.

Then you must see this.
As Ive heard somewhere, "If it is on the Internet, it must be true." :)

I just don't get Suse, the company. Their YAST and YAST2 programs are under their own, non-GPL license. I believe the distribution as a whole is under a funny license as well. They refuse to release installation iso's for 7.0 or 7.1 for x86. If you frequent LinuxIso.org you know what I'm talking about. But Suse released "live evaluation" iso's of 7.0 and 7.1. You can install Suse from ftp. You can even download installation iso's for every other arcitechture that they support. But not for x86. It just baffles me.

Linux Central just recently added a Suse 7.0 disc to their Linux Cental CD-Roms selection. But not 7.1. I know I could roll my own and stuff, but the new Redhat, Conectiva, and Debian beckon to come and try them out as well. Rather waste my time messing with getting Linux From Scratch working, than trying to get Suse installed.

I know. The patent answer is "It's business, stupid", but that argument doesn't make much sense when *all* of your competition is offering 'free samples', but you're not. As a dumb American, what's the reason for going with Suse instead of Redhat or Mandrake, or even Storm or Progeny? I just don't get it.

One other thing, if anyone can help me. One of the most annoying things right now for me is the lack of good fonts in web pages under Konq. Do the boxed distros include fonts that aren't included in the download versions? I haven't bought a boxed distro in almost six months and it's about time to get one. I'll definately get one sooner than later if I can get some better fonts.

And finally, I feel the need to pimp some of the very cool distros I've come across. I've haven't been able to try these out yet (doh. got to get a cd burner.) but they do look cool. First, Caldera has released a beta for their upcoming 3.1 workstation release. Their is a review of it at Linux Planet. The coolest transistion distro I've found is Redmond Linux. Tries to focus on the destop and do away with the need for the command line. There is also Demudi. The Debian Multimedia Distribution. The name says it all. Then there's a few of the more hardcore, hacker type distros: Rock Linux, Stampede Linux, and Linux From Scratch. And last, but not least. The most vaporous of them all. Microsoft Linux.

Word mslinux up.

You want MS Linux? Here you are. :)

1. it's free.
2. it's better than the alternatives.
3. it's not made by M$

anybody running linux would use another distro, like Debian. I really doubt that M$ could shut down all linux distros since non-commercial ones such as Debian could never be bought out. I think that if Microsoft were to purchase Redhat and create their own linux distro they would still keep Windows around. So you might as well run Windows instead...

On the topic of OSes, there's this one real funny site I went to recently which tells us about Microsoft's next generation of Os's. Its funny but a scary thought Anyways go to MS Linux !!

What does this mean for sites like www.microsith.com, and even worse, http://www.mslinux.org?

Oh goody. Finally a distribution of Linux that's pre-destined to be more pissed on than Red Hat.

It's good not to run the underdog anymore.