Linked by Dan Massameno on Wed 4th May 2011 21:28 UTC
Microsoft Microsoft has released new details on an experimental operating system concept named Drawbridge. In early March Microsoft researchers presented a paper entitled Rethinking the Library OS from the Top Down. The paper describes a new interaction between a user-level application and its OS. The paper can be found at the ACM Digital Library [frustratingly, we can't redistribute the article since it's behind a paywall, like too much of the scientific world]. It describes an ambitious plan to separate the traditional API parts of an OS from the underlying kernel of the OS. But a full analysis requires some background.
Thread beginning with comment 471819
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by project_2501 on Wed 4th May 2011 22:30 UTC
Member since:

This is terrible. Look at the benefits - cleaner exits of applications, security. Instead of creating a simpler more elegant design they go the opposite direction and create a crazy monster solution... only Microsoft could make a virtue out of this.

Reply Score: 1

RE: terrible
by kaiwai on Thu 5th May 2011 02:51 in reply to "terrible"
kaiwai Member since:

How is it terrible? If you create an application and compile it into the said package then a future release Microsoft can make some radical changes and not have to worry about backwards compatibility. For example in Windows 8 they could make some major changes to the operating system such as removing old crufty APIs etc. and old applications using the packaging system would continue working without any problems.

It appears that Microsoft is moving towards a three tier model of backwards compatibility; virtualisation (hosting a complete operating system), the packaging model in said article and then native applications. As part of this packaging will it also include ARM/x86/x64 binaries all in one package? that would be a great feature if they not only provided the above packaging for compatibility but multiple binaries as well.

Reply Parent Score: 3