Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's New Core OS Team Learning from Linux
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,".
"
Microsoft isn't stupid, Linux is a great study in OS Development, and they are using it to their advantage.
Is there any evidence that this is anything other then an organizational change? I mean apart from the thoughts of an analyst who doesn't really know? Analysts get compensated for getting their company's name in the press.
Read Epic the first RPG novel.
Microsoft might say that they admire the way that linux contributors interract, but I think it will be a cold day in hell before the admit that they're implementing technical features of linux.
I'm going to go against the grain and NOT make this an "I told ya so" MS-bash. From a business perspective, it makes sense for them to learn from Linux, just as it would make sense for Linux to learn things from MS. Each do things differently that work. It's generally regarded that Linux has a better core, better security, and fewer bloat-features that introduce vulnerabilities. It's also generally regarded that Microsoft has superior usability/UI. In the end, for my mom, Microsoft wins. If this new MS team can improve the core to the point where it's as good or better than Linux, then the only reason anyone would use Linux would be cost.
At the same time, Linux's usability has been improving, it'll be interesting to see what happens when MS and Linux converge to the point where they're both as usable AND both as secure/stable/etc.
Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. --Nietzsche
If M$ won't adopt Linux, at least it will use ideas developed in the open source community to help Windows become a better operating system. Isn't that what we all want? Better operating systems?
Denigrate it loudly while duplicating it quietly.
It's the opensource way!
yeah and what's great for them is that no one could prove they were either. yay for closed source development
As anyone who has ever worked in a commerical software house can tell you, for every one super-skilled developer writing code, there are dozens (hundreds?) of others who are not.
The reason that Linux's codebase has remained so cohesive, focused, and flexible is that Linux has so many really skilled developers -- the kind that most companies are fortunate to have just a handful of.
Software development is one thing where the difference in output between the most skilled person and the average person can be orders of magnitude.
There really aren't many other fields or occupations where you could argue that the top people/employees are orders of magnitude better than the median person/employee.
It's not just code they are looking at. Windows and Linux use entirely different kernel architectures. They are looking at development methods.
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
It was only a couple days later that Firebird was released, right? Right?
Good thing operating systems are so much simpler than web browsers.
For 1500 years alchemists worked tirelessly in their secret labs making potions and spells with the ultimate goal of turning whatever into gold. 1500 years wasted because everone kept everything secret. Chemistry came along when people published and studied work of others. After 300 years we know it takes a nuclear reaction to turn something else into gold. Linux is like chemistry. Microsoft isn't. Get the idea?
And if only Apple weren't so resistant to copying back from MS.....
MS doesn't care who came up with an idea. If customers like it, they'll absorb it. If Apple popularized it, then fine, it's popular, and MS will accept it on that basis.
Apple seems to be the opposite. If MS popularized it, they don't want it, no matter how well-liked it is. It seems to offend their sense of being the ones with all the best UI ideas to acknowledge that a different UI approach from Microsoft(!) might actually be better.
Terrific ideas like the task bar, 2-button mice, scroll wheels, quitting an app when you close its document window, etc., have proven themselves in the mass market, but it took Apple forever to add a task bar (they probably couldn't release it until it looked sufficiently different from MS's) and "the mouse you can operate with your foot" is still the standard despite the fact that every seven-year-old in the US is handling a two-button mouse without confusion.
I've always admired Steve Jobs' passion for creating insanely great products, and innovation is a big part of it. But, I think the products could be even better if Apple had the humility to do a little more copying from less innovative sources that still manage to come up with some good ideas every now and then.
"Those who have never entered upon scientific pursuits know not a tithe of the poetry by which they are surrounded."