Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Working On "Post-Windows" Cloud Computing OS
Barence writes "Microsoft is working on a web-based operating system called Midori, as it looks to life beyond Windows. Midori is expected to be a cloud-computing service, and so not as dependent on hardware as current generations of Windows. It's also expected to run with a virtualization layer between the hardware and the OS, and is expected to be a commercial offshoot of the Singularity research project which Microsoft has been working on since 2003." If this story sounds familiar to you, it probably is.
...welcome our old software-as-a-service overlords.
As apparently it comes with a dupe detector built in. Well if "well respected" journalists can claim things based on supposition and hope then surely I can as well?
You mean a kind of, say, Hardware Abstraction Layer?
Yeah... they've been doing that kind of thing for over ten years.
Cloud 9!
too bad it's by definition vaporware.
Why was this abortion of an article selected, when there is a better ars one here, and BBC here
Well, can't wait to pay for midori monthly, then office monthly, VS monthly, maybe media services monthly. MS will make 10 times the money they do now off software that you probably already have. Best part is every version that comes out we rush to get because we think it is going to be better.We haven't learned to use most of the functionality of the software version you are replacing.
So: did someone in Microsoft just like the name, or is it a cunning way to express that they themselves don't quite know what this operating system is actually going to be? And is it time for anybody using the word in the US to get in a trademark application, just in case?
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
I, personally, think they are digging their own grave with this one.
There just isn't enough bandwidth everywhere for there to be a totally online OS.
Don't tell me, let me guess. It will have all the stuff Microsoft that was going to be in every version of Windows since Windows 95.
As the release date approaches, Microsoft will suddenly start echoing all the knocks critics have been making on Vista, saying it is insecure, difficult to use, presents a bad user experience and is generally a piece of junk which only fools would ever have purchased... but, fortunately, Midori will solve all these problems, and will include a Web-standards-compliant browser, an animated character that will pop up and give you only helpful advice and only when you actually need it, WinFS, and Duke Nukem Forever.
And if you believe them, then you'd believe that Lucy will finally let Charlie Brown kick the football.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Yes there is, the difference is, it can't be written by MS. A small team of hackers could probably code a decent OS that is web based, but as MS has shown us, they are incapable of coding for the present generation of hardware, so the OS they make won't be usable until everyone has 50 MB/Second connections.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
The following is copied from my journal. It's a comment concerning the microkernel protection mechanisms of Midori which was intended to be posted in the previous story, but unfortunately I modded that one. This time, dupes actually help ;) :
"SIP", or "Software isolated processes" is just MS marketing hype speak for what is known as a Language-based system in which seperate processes can be isolated from one another without paging or other hardware protection mechanisms. This is done using the semantics of the language in which the processes are programmed which excludes any possibility of one process intruding into the address space of another.
One example of a similar OS would be Bell Labs' Inferno. ( thanks to Knots for pointing this out ) Also, there's JX, which is an open-source microkernel based operating system in which the (micro)kernel and the applications are written in Java and run under a modified version of the JVM.
jdb2
Yeah, it's MS, but before jumping completely on the stomp-it-dead bandwagon, I'd say this: We thought Apple was dead once too. If MS can do some real innovation here, and bring a new paradigm to an operating system, we'll be lucky. Innovation never hurt anyone, and it may come when you least expect it. If Apple can pull off a 180, so can Microsoft.
Who cares if they are relatively inefficient. Could a thin client browse the web, check email, play youtube videos? Sure! But why should I get my aging mother to buy a new one when her 3 year old PC is still doing just fine? What's the motivating factor? Not only will I have to motivate her to buy a new PC, but I'll also have to convince her to pay for a monthly service so that she can do all the same stuff she currently does for free. And all the documents that she has, many of which are sensitive in nature, are now going to be hosted on the internet. I'm failing to see why any post about cloud computing for consumers is tagged as anything other than "badidea;goodluckwiththat".
And for as 'relatively inefficient' as desktop PC's are, the network connection you rely on is significantly more inefficient. Sure, passing text blocks isn't a problem, even passing low resolution video only requires a few minutes of queuing. But have you ever tried playing a video game over remote desktop where instead of sending the data across the network you are sending full screen images? I'll give you a hint, even if the cloud computing is rendering 9000 frames per second, you'll be getting a max of 1 frame per second on a 19" monitor at a decent resolution.
And there in lies the rub, if you have a system that is powerful enough to play any modern graphics intensive video game, you have a machine that is more than capable of doing everything else the average consumer would do. Buying a new machine, OS, and dealing with all the pain and inconsistencies of depending on SaS is not a worth while investment.
Corporate use? Maybe. But consumer use? no way. This is not going to be the "next Windows".
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
First .NET, now this. Why Microsoft's mania for virtual machines, considering they only support x86 targets? Microsoft at one point supported NT for PowerPC, MIPS, Alpha, and x86, and that was with hard-compiled code. So it's not about portability. It seemed to be more like Microsoft's answer to Java - if Sun was succeeding in that market, Microsoft had to go there too.
Rather than trying to use software-separated processes, it would be more useful to improve message passing so that hardware-separated processes could talk to each other better. This, by the way, is one of the big weaknesses of the UNIX/Linux world. In UNIX/Linux, interprocess communication sucks. What you usually want is an interprocess subroutine call, or "synchronous message-oriented interprocess communication". What UNIX and Linux give you are pipes (one way, stream-oriented, asynchronous), sockets (two way, stream oriented, excessive overhead, asynchronous), System V IPC (used by nobody, message oriented, two way, asynchronous), and shared memory (unsafe, one process can crash another). There's no safe, synchronous message passing system. You can build one atop the existing mechanism, but there's a big performance penalty. The result is huge, monolithic applications, or systems that use "plug-ins" that can crash the entire application (i.e. Apache). Fast message passing has a bad history in the UNIX world, due to the Mach debacle, but it works fine in QNX, IBM VM, and hypervisors like Xen. (Windows has fast message passing, although for historical reasons in the 16-bit era it's somewhat clunky and too tied to the windowing system.)
Windows at least has a standardized approach to message passing. The UNIX/Linux world does not. This leads to a proliferation of mechanisms for doing the same thing. Both KDE and OpenOffice use CORBA for message passing, but they don't use compatible versions of it.