Why won't Microsoft just fucking rewrite the entire OS and kernel from scratch? They've been dragging the same kernel and OS for years, while it screams in agony as Microsoft staples on more and more bullshit.
Why work hard when you can do little work and retards will still buy your stale shit.
>>54355172
I don't know, but current Windows resembles the NT/Vista kernel with some awful metro system frankenstined onto it. I don't even know if they have any coders over there smart enough to do it.
>>54355172
Considering Windows is the biggest market share in the consumer and business market which rely on software that might be incompatible if said kernel was rebuilt from scratch instead of using the NT kernel, yeah.
It is the same thing but I would think people would go nuts if they decided to bring something new and suddenly most of the software that's already out there didn't work at all.
>>54355172
Backwards compatibility.
>>54355242
/thread
check this op
>>53741805
as far as I know they update the kernel on each major update, lastest I remember was for win8....then I stopped following shit
you're right, a rework would help....but, dude, entire windows kernel from scratch?!.....with all compatible hardware it will cause fucking compatibility disaster
>>54355172
they did already in mid 90s. actually the kernel is quite good. they should rewrite the userland stuff though.
They changed the version number, isn't that enough?!
>>54355419
kek
how am i suppose to run my old programs with a new kernel and os?
>>54355534
like apple did with transition to OS X, virtualization layers.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/whatever-happened-to-microsofts-midori-operating-system-project/
It was happening at one point.
the supposed Microsoft insiders that post here make it sound like Microsoft is too incompetent to do it.
>>54355195
this
>>54355172
Dumb
>>54355610
Dumber
>>54355710
worked for Apple.
>>54355705
So long as they put Dave Cutler in charge of heading up a new kernel team they should be in safe hands.
There's no reason whatsoever to create a new kernel though, it's billions of dollars spent for 0 reason. It would be better spent cleaning up and enhancing the existing NT kernel.
For example, moving some systems back in to userspace for stability and security reasons. An example would be the graphics system - it was moved in to the kernel in NT4 to speed up the OS.
Early NT releases were fucking slow as shit.
They did, it was called singularity and it sucked balls.
>>54355705
obligatory, in case theres someone who hasnt seen it
>>54355832
>tl;dr shit sucks at a huge software company
>>54355832
Man, is there more of this. This is fucking gold.
Why rewrite the best kernel for desktop computers out there? Best response times and performance for desktop, best memory management, best security and mitigation, features other OSes only dream of like recovering from video drivers crashes, etc.
Windows is not perfect, but the kernel is not the problem here.
>>54355172
Won't that completely destroy its programs library, like every program made for windows would stop working since it has no idea how to fucking work on an os with a whole different dll libraryb or architecture.
