Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Plans Hypervisor for Longhorn

ninjee writes "Microsoft reiterated plans to launch its own Windows-based 'hypervisor' software for running multiple operating systems. Bob Muglia, senior vice president in the Windows Server Division, said on Tuesday that the software will be 'built directly in Windows and will allow companies to virtualize multiple operating systems.' "

5 of 384 comments (clear)

  1. Unix Support? by geomon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wonder how many of the x86 family of Unix will run in this Windows-based virtualization product. I don't think Microsoft would intentionally cripple the functionality of a *nix OS running in hypervision, but they might.

    --
    "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    1. Re:Unix Support? by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's a marvelous thing to give out billions of dollars. However, it is inconsistent to, at the same time, use dirty tricks and your monopolistic position to destroy competitors. I'm in the "Why Should I Forgive Darth Vader" camp. Sorry, good deeds don't excuse the bad ones. If Bill Gates truly wanted to show that he's a good person, he'd start by repudiating the tactics that MS has used gain market dominance and instruct Ballmer to quit bullshitting and spreading FUD. And the Microsoft lackey who modded me a troll can mod this a troll to if he wants. I have no respect for Gates, who ran a company convicted of monopolistic abuses. He's a goddamn crook, no matter how many vaccines he buys for third world kids. Period.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  2. DRM by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They are doing this for DRM.

    Their Hypervisor will enforce DRM, so even linux can't override it.

    They'll make it so all device drivers must be signed to go into the Hypervisor which will be the only thing with any I/O privs that aren't virtualized.

    They'll make it so new hardware has closed interfaces and can only be supported by a driver at the Hypervisor level.

    Any drivers in any OS level won't be able to circumvent the DRM, since they'll just THINK they are talking to hardware, but will get virtual hardware instead - and the Hypervisor won't let it read any protected content through the virtual I/O, it will blank it out (e.g. all zero bytes from the "soundcard") or something similar.

    The drivers designed for the Hypervisor won't work in any higher level, since they'll need to do a crypographic handshake with the hardware to verify it is "real" and the hardware will also monitor bus activity so it'll know if any extraneous activity is occur (as it would if it was being virtualized).

    Everything will have a standard interface to the O/S, so Linux will still run but be very limited and slowed down - since only Windows will be allowed "preferred" access to hardware, other O/S will be deliberately crippled.

    They'll say you can still run Linux.

    Hardware manufacturers won't release specs, they'll say use the Hypervisor and you can still use Linux.

    You'll still need to buy Windows to use any hardware - Linux won't even boot on the raw hardware.

    MS doesn't care if Linux isn't killed - the above allows them lock in - no windows - your PC won't boot - since nothing but the Hypervisor will know how to talk to the IDE card, etc.

    What about manufacturers that want to support open interfaces, etc? Microsoft will deny them a key which they will need to talk to the Hypervisor - and the Hypervisor will refuse to talk to them.

    Support anything other than solely the Hypervisor and you can't use the Hypervisor. No Windows - lose too many sales.

    And they can say other O/S's are still allowed.

    They'll just not be able to give you freedom to use your hardware as you see fit (DRM, need to pay more to get software to unlock other features on your hardware), only Windows will run well, and you need a Windows license and Hypervisor for every PC or else it is unbootable.

    --
    Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    1. Re:DRM by iphayd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You have to realize that MS is no longer able to dictate _all_ of the PC specs.

      - I couldn't imagine that Apple will build a box that requires Hypervisor to run.
      - I couldn't imagine IBM will build servers that require Hypervisor to run.
      - I couldn't imagine HP will build machines that require Hypervisor to run.

      These three companies have a vested interest in _not_ allowing Microsoft the kind of power that you are suggesting.

  3. So they have time for this but not WinFS? by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The thing about Hypervisor that seems strange is that it was NOT cut from Longhorn while some other, more interesting, bits were.

    That says that it is strategically very important to Microsoft.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley