OSNews: http://www.osnews.com/story/20011/Midori_A_Non-Windows_OS_in_the_Works_Not_Just_Experimental Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:02:57 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif OSNews.com http://www.osnews.com Comment by stestagg http://osnews.com/thread?322207 http://osnews.com/thread?322207 My guess is that by the time this thing is released, backwards compatibility will be provided through virtualization, and so the compatibility barrier will be much lower Wed, 09 Jul 2008 21:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (stestagg) Comments RE: Comment by stestagg http://osnews.com/thread?322210 http://osnews.com/thread?322210 yes, I concurEdited 2008-07-09 21:19 UTC Wed, 09 Jul 2008 21:19:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Luminair) Comments About freakin time http://osnews.com/thread?322211 http://osnews.com/thread?322211 Singularity is a very interesting OS. It is nice to see them actually doing something real with it. Wed, 09 Jul 2008 21:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (google_ninja) Comments RE: Comment by stestagg http://osnews.com/thread?322212 http://osnews.com/thread?322212 I agree, it's entirely possible. Think of the seamless virtualization of VMWare Fusion or Parallels. Users won't even notice that a window is running under a legacy OS. Only drivers and perhaps services will be required to be native on the new OS. Wed, 09 Jul 2008 21:40:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (tdemj) Comments RE: About freakin time http://osnews.com/thread?322216 http://osnews.com/thread?322216 How can you say it is a very good OS, when it is not released yet ?

Do you mean, in principle, it is a good OS ?
Or
it has the potential to become a good OS ?

Do not count your chickens Wed, 09 Jul 2008 22:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Whats That There) Comments RE[2]: Comment by stestagg http://osnews.com/thread?322217 http://osnews.com/thread?322217 which is what Vista shoulda had. Something like this should have been done a LONG time ago. Wed, 09 Jul 2008 22:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (helf) Comments RE[2]: About freakin time http://osnews.com/thread?322220 http://osnews.com/thread?322220 It is based on singularity, and singularity has some very modern and innovative ideas. NT is based on VMS, which is fairly conservative as kernels go.

The big shame about singularity was that it has been a research project for years now. It went under MS-RL a few months ago, but that still kept people from making a working implementation (reference license basically means read-only source code)

If this actually takes off, I would say it would be the most interesting (serious) project in the OS space since the BeOS microkernel. Wed, 09 Jul 2008 22:42:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (google_ninja) Comments This seems rumour http://osnews.com/thread?322223 http://osnews.com/thread?322223 Microsoft may be stupid but not that stupid to get rid of the stable windows kernel and use a new .NET based OS.

Instead I think the new OS from Microsoft would be minwin i.e. a stripped down version of windows kernel either in Windows 7 or 8. There were already rumours that MS and Asus are working together to port this mini Windows 7 version on ASUS EEE. Wed, 09 Jul 2008 22:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (CrazyDude1) Comments RE: This seems rumour http://osnews.com/thread?322225 http://osnews.com/thread?322225
Codename Midori (I wish Microsoft named it "Doors" instead) is a derivative of Singularity that is meant to supersede Windows, and it is more than just a research project. Still, it is not ready to be previewed and it definitely has not got anything to do with Windows 7. Microsoft has put aside substantial resources and has put many bright people behind the project, which is headed by Eric Rudder, but other than that, very little is known. If it ever does debut, it will probably become available some time before CEO Steve Ballmer retires, nine or so years from now


If you read the article, you would see

A) It is not a rumour
B) it is based on singularity

Chances are if v1 is done in 9 years, and we use NT adoption as a reference, we are talking 16 years before this would become mainstream. That means this is a "looking ahead" type of project. Wed, 09 Jul 2008 23:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (google_ninja) Comments RE[3]: Comment by stestagg http://osnews.com/thread?322236 http://osnews.com/thread?322236 why is that being voted down? What the hell is wrong with you people? Thu, 10 Jul 2008 00:39:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (helf) Comments RE[2]: About freakin time http://osnews.com/thread?322242 http://osnews.com/thread?322242
How can you say it is a very good OS, when it is not released yet ?


Read for comprehension: He said it was a "very interesting OS." Thu, 10 Jul 2008 01:15:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (tomcat) Comments RE[4]: Comment by stestagg http://osnews.com/thread?322243 http://osnews.com/thread?322243 I'm guessing those that voted your comment down felt it was off topic and had the potential of derailing the thread into just one more "vista sucks" fest. Thu, 10 Jul 2008 01:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (MollyC) Comments I have a feeling http://osnews.com/thread?322260 http://osnews.com/thread?322260 I have a feeling that we'll start to see this in niche situations; possibly in the portable area first, then followed by maybe HPC, then work its way to the middle - then again, given the new devices these days, I have a feeling that eventually the desktop's days will be numbered.

I'd love to see this as a success - even as a Mac user, the added competition will improve product quality over all. Its too bad, however, that Microsoft does have a reputation for taking a wonderful idea and completely butchering it. Case in point would be Windows NT, and the silly things they did in NT4 (moving graphics into kernel space). Thu, 10 Jul 2008 04:18:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (kaiwai) Comments RE[3]: About freakin time http://osnews.com/thread?322271 http://osnews.com/thread?322271 yes, but can I install it ?
can I buy it right now ? Thu, 10 Jul 2008 06:21:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Whats That There) Comments RE[4]: About freakin time http://osnews.com/thread?322291 http://osnews.com/thread?322291 you don't have to buy it, singularity is free to download and run/compile.

It obvious that Microsoft has to look ahead, we have newer technologies and newer methods and needs for using the technologoies.

I agree that the NT Kernel and most the NT systems are good, however how long can Microsoft keep extending these systems to take advantage of newer tech.

I think the biggest requirement for an OS is to take advantage of mutliple cores and to provide an easier way for applications that run on the OS to take advantage. We see apple going this way with Grand Central, intel have stated that they see future chips with hundreds and thousands of cores, we have GPU's which contain a wealth of computing power.

Microsoft really excell's when they are put under pressure, although sharing the same kernel the difference between Vista and Server 2008 is night and day, proving that the userland/UI is the biggest problem in Vista, we have Mac OSX and Linux (unix's) that will hopefully push Microsoft to get out of this medocracy pattern they have been in for the past 8 years and start giving some real value for money, everything after Windows 2000 seems like a can't be bothered slap some new paint on it approach.Edited 2008-07-10 08:46 UTC Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:45:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (REM2000) Comments RE: I have a feeling http://osnews.com/thread?322329 http://osnews.com/thread?322329 Isn't graphics normally in kernel space? Don't know how it works on a mac, but in linux it is too. Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (google_ninja) Comments RE[2]: I have a feeling http://osnews.com/thread?322347 http://osnews.com/thread?322347
Isn't graphics normally in kernel space? Don't know how it works on a mac, but in linux it is too.


Actually, if you look at Linux, only a *VERY* small amount exists in kernel space, infact, it is more of a 'door way' for the Xorg server driver to speed up talking to the video card.

The problem is that with Windows is they threw the WHOLE driver into kernel space. Rather than keeping the heavy loading in user space, and have a small short cut, they improved 'teh snappy' through brute force. Windows Vista has changed things, and from what it appears, more of the driver now sits in user space, which allows graceful recovery rather than a BSOD.

As for Mac, I'm unsure how things work in the Mac world given I haven't really investigated all that heavily into how the whole graphics layer works. What ever the case, it seems to do the job required with minimum fuss and bother. Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (kaiwai) Comments RE[2]: I have a feeling http://osnews.com/thread?322368 http://osnews.com/thread?322368 NT was originally very microkernel-ish and sensibly put a lot of driver stuff in userspace, only later on moving graphics into the kernel. MacOS, which itself tries to be microkernel-ish, these days does what Windows does now and throws graphics into the kernel, for performance reasons.

Linux is much the same, though as a monolithic kernel it bears no shame for putting graphics stuff into the kernel. *nix systems in general try to leave as much as possible to X, but as I understand it a good deal winds up in the kernel anyway. Thu, 10 Jul 2008 18:01:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sorpigal) Comments RE[3]: I have a feeling http://osnews.com/thread?322421 http://osnews.com/thread?322421 Video is in userland in Vista. Thu, 10 Jul 2008 23:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (andrewg) Comments RE[3]: I have a feeling http://osnews.com/thread?322422 http://osnews.com/thread?322422 That is sorta what I understood, for hybrid kernels it makes sense to put graphics in kernel space due to perf issues. Thu, 10 Jul 2008 23:45:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (google_ninja) Comments