The Microsoft Singularity

jose parinas writes ""Microsoft Research has published the first details of a wholly new operating system under development called Singularity, designed new from the ground up, built on a new language and designed with emphasis on dependability instead of performance.""

Comments

Papers?

[conJunk]

did anyone check out the "papers" section? while i'll certainly try to keep an open mind and judge the final project on its merits, it's hard to take something seriously when its website is gussied-up with a bunch of papers, pretending to lend an air of accademic support for this project

all those papers were either given at microsoft headquarts, or the HotOS conference, which was an invitation-only do sponosored by Microsoft's reasearch department.

i really want to be open minded. microsoft *has* been responsible for some real innovation, and *does* have a few products that work really well. hell, singularity might even be cool. i just get a little doubtful, and certainly turned off, when i see that it's leaning on a pile of pseudo-academic support for credibility.

another longhorn?

[amacachi]

so theyre building from the ground up, just like they were going to with longhorn. whoop de do

This just in MS sucks...already Slash Dotted

[haplo21112]

Only 18 comments in and the links are already slashdotted...

Just goes to show what IIS and SQL Server will do for you....

Benefit of the Doubt

[ndansmith]

Is anyone at all excited about this possibility? I am.

Microsoft's OSs have bloated and become bogged down, just piling each new generation on top of the heap. This provides a chance for Microsoft to flex its development muscle (i.e. money) to get something done, free from the constraints of history. Imagine a world without the registry and .DLLs! Imagine a world where Windows is based on a functional command prompt!

Of course, this would really suck for all those developers who have fine-tuned their software to Windows madness only to have it all exploded a few years down the line.

Still, I am going to give MS the benefit of the doubt on this one. Of course, since it is still vaporware, there is much doubt, and therefore much benefit. We'll see what happens when the fog clears . . .

Features?

[smittyoneeach]

Likely it will by default hide entire file names, and not merely the file extensions, for known types.
Just wasted 10 minutes on that degenerate, perverted mis-feature.
Props to /. for affording me an opportunity to share my enthusiasm for Redmond's non-command of OS design.

That isn't the question.

[khasim]

The question isn't whether they've made flawed products.

The question isn't whether they make flawed products.

The question is what have they made that's "innovative".

If they haven't made anything "innovative", then by definition, their products are copies and derivatives of others.

Don't get upset over the word. I'm sure that you'd buy a new car even if there wasn't a single bit of it that was "innovative".

And "innovative" does not mean "better" or "best" or "great" or anything other than "innovative".

Re:pseudo-academics should be careful what they ba

[networkBoy]

I won't trust the security of a M$ OS until the source is opened. (Note I don't mean open source, just that the source is available to all for peer review, even if full copy and distrobution rights are maintained).
-nB

division by zero

[vlad_petric]

We used to say that "Singularity is when God divides by zero". Now it'll be "Singularity is when Bill Gates divides by zero".

For a lot of M$ drones that consider Bill Gates a god, it won't be that much of a difference