If microsoft had their own OPEN SOURCE linux...

[themarker0]

Don't you think it would be pretty good? Microsofts programmers are very well. I've met a couple, and there skills are amazing. To me that leaves management, and primary goals to what there main problem lies. I think an microsoft linux distro would be rather interesting.

Remember they did contribute 20,000 codes of line to the kernel for drivers.


Also i can't post in recurring to start, and i couldn't find one lately, so i thought i'd ask.

[cammin]

OpenSuse looks like any other linux distro.

[Phrea]

Wouldn't surprise me one bit if they do have one, just not released, and just to see what 'the competition' is doing, and if they can improve on it.

EDIT: bold statement: they will release their own version within 5 years from now, if not 2.

[dragos240]

They do. (http://www.mslinux.org/)

[Phrea]

They do. (http://www.mslinux.org/)

Gheheh, good one. :lolflag:

[arizwan]

I agree wholeheartedly, and am kind of surprised I haven't thought of that before.

Microsoft hires a lot of kids from my school (UIUC) and department (CS) which are usually the cream of the crop in terms of CS skills and abilities. I'm sure you're right about the issues in microsoft's products being products of holes in the management side. They could really help bridge the gap between the open source community and the things linux lacks in, (gaming in particular comes to my mind, which is one thing that I know has kept people from coming to linux, even though they love it a lot, or at least keeps them dual booting)

Also, I didn't know Microsoft worked on OpenSuse?

[Phrea]

Also, I didn't know Microsoft worked on OpenSuse?

People tend to forget a lot about MS's contributions to the computer world.
They made the Altair actually work and do something, for instance.
They also worked on applications for the original Apple Mac etc.

No matter what you think of MS and/or Gates/Allan, but they had a HUGE influence on what we know today as home computers.

[Simian Man]

Microsoft actually developed a Unix variant called Xenix (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix) back in the day. I'm sure if they developed a Linux distro it would be of high quality, but there's really no reason for them to do so.


Also, I didn't know Microsoft worked on OpenSuse?

They don't. It was a slight against OpenSuse for making an interoperability deal with Microsoft.

[Phrea]

Microsoft actually developed a Unix variant called Xenix (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix) back in the day. I'm sure if they developed a Linux distro it would be of high quality, but there's really no reason for them to do so.

I didn't know about Xenix [Unix wasn't OS, but still].
As to your last remark: there is a reason: learning.

[handy]

If they decided it was in their best interest to have a Linux distro, I think they would just buy a well known distro & carry on from there. Red Hat would probably be a prime candidate.

[themarker0]

If they decided it was in their best interest to have a Linux distro, I think they would just buy a well known distro & carry on from there. Red Hat would probably be a prime candidate.

I would hope not, i think they have the talent to go limitless. Even more so with a userbase their size!

[Khakilang]

The sky is the limit if they go out and create one.

[kmsalex]

have any of you actually you used windows recently? i know i have, and from my experience its defiantly not of such high quality! so why do you think they would do any better with a Linux distro?

[nmccrina]

If they decided it was in their best interest to have a Linux distro, I think they would just buy a well known distro & carry on from there. Red Hat would probably be a prime candidate.

Given their track record, that would definitely seem to be the most likely scenario.


have any of you actually you used windows recently? i know i have, and from my experience its defiantly not of such high quality! so why do you think they would do any better with a Linux distro?

O.o

Personally, I think that Windows 7 is amazing. Very awesome. Usability-wise I probably like it better than Linux, but Linux has all the intangibles.

[Crunchy the Headcrab]

have any of you actually you used windows recently? i know i have, and from my experience its defiantly not of such high quality! so why do you think they would do any better with a Linux distro?
Everything since XP has been pretty nice imo.

[cguy]

Personally, I think that Windows 7 is amazing. Very awesome. Usability-wise I probably like it better than Linux, but Linux has all the intangibles.
Riiiiight, right, right, right, right!
Use W7 for an year and then we'll talk. It's about that old on my sister's powerful laptop and it reminds me of the Pentium 3 + 128MB of RAM days.
Last night I spend ~45 minutes (!) to get some drivers for the phone installed. Whenever I plug an USB stick I must wait a lot for the 'drivers' to be installed.
Searching in the start menu? Have some patience! It will last a good amount of seconds.
Application launching? I could get a shave between the double click on the icon and an usable application.
And good luck in getting the trackpad scroll or the right corner click working! (There goes usability...)


The WUBI installation on that laptop, on the other hand, FLIES!!!

So that "talent" their programmers have, if they do have it, they are certainly keeping it to themselves.

PS: actually, I do think they've got talent and all, but somehow the final product is still a mess.

[asddf]

Well in 10 years, all their talented programmers have done is, added a new task bar to windows 7.

Apart from that Windows 7 and XP, have the same functionality.

[trig]

Well a open source version of vista..... no thank you.

[cascade9]

If they decided it was in their best interest to have a Linux distro, I think they would just buy a well known distro & carry on from there. Red Hat would probably be a prime candidate.

Yes, thats what micorsoft does. Not quite sure if RedHat would be what they would buy out, but its an option.

[alexfish]

I agree wholeheartedly, and am kind of surprised I haven't thought of that before.

Microsoft hires a lot of kids from my school (UIUC) and department (CS) which are usually the cream of the crop in terms of CS skills and abilities. I'm sure you're right about the issues in microsoft's products being products of holes in the management side. They could really help bridge the gap between the open source community and the things linux lacks in, (gaming in particular comes to my mind, which is one thing that I know has kept people from coming to linux, even though they love it a lot, or at least keeps them dual booting)

Also, I didn't know Microsoft worked on OpenSuse?

For me this is a no go situation or acceptable in the world of Foss

Trading on the history of Microsoft , pay for the OS , then pay for further licensing if you want to develop applications , pay for software , initially this may look reasonable

Then Microsoft generally changes the OS so you then have to pay again and again and again , as regards to software there seems to be a trait of dropping support where ever it feels like , and don't give a fig about the consequences.

I notice from your post to Hi Light the CREAM OF THE CROP in terms of Education ,this is not an acceptable practice in today's world. hope some of them realise what they are letting them selves in for .

of all the years of Knowing and using Microsoft there is no Gap to Bridge ,

to highlight again " usually the cream of the crop in terms of CS skills and abilities " perhaps they could help in Bridging the Gap .

regards

alexfish

[3rdalbum]

If Microsoft made their own Linux distribution, it would be terrible. Unusable.

And people switching from Windows would try and use it because they've heard of the company behind it (Microsoft), and get a negative impression of Linux, and go back to Windows.

No thanks.

[Excedio]

If Microsoft made their own Linux distribution, it would be terrible. Unusable.

And people switching from Windows would try and use it because they've heard of the company behind it (Microsoft), and get a negative impression of Linux, and go back to Windows.

No thanks.

Maybe this would be the goal. Crate a crappy version of a Linux distro that gets the Microsoft hype. Then when the User hates it (and hates Linux with it), the go back to Windows for good.

[nmccrina]

Riiiiight, right, right, right, right!
Use W7 for an year and then we'll talk. It's about that old on my sister's powerful laptop and it reminds me of the Pentium 3 + 128MB of RAM days.
Last night I spend ~45 minutes (!) to get some drivers for the phone installed. Whenever I plug an USB stick I must wait a lot for the 'drivers' to be installed.
Searching in the start menu? Have some patience! It will last a good amount of seconds.
Application launching? I could get a shave between the double click on the icon and an usable application.
And good luck in getting the trackpad scroll or the right corner click working! (There goes usability...)


The WUBI installation on that laptop, on the other hand, FLIES!!!

So that "talent" their programmers have, if they do have it, they are certainly keeping it to themselves.

PS: actually, I do think they've got talent and all, but somehow the final product is still a mess.

Well, you have to realize that I'm very OCD about installing stuff (in Linux or Windows). Whenever possible I look for programs that have a portable version (i.e., just unzip and run, no registry editing etc.) I don't run antivirus either, since I feel that Firefox + NoScript + router firewall is enough. So I have very little startup/taskbar stuff and the registry never really gets bloated. I haven't noticed any slowdown. :cool:

Edit: didn't Windows 7 come out in like November? How is it almost a year old on your sister's laptop?

[Excedio]

Edit: didn't Windows 7 come out in like November? How is it almost a year old on your sister's laptop?

Beta??? :confused:

[forrestcupp]

If Microsoft made their own Linux distribution, it would be terrible. Unusable.

And people switching from Windows would try and use it because they've heard of the company behind it (Microsoft), and get a negative impression of Linux, and go back to Windows.

No thanks.

If Microsoft was smart, that's exactly what they'd do. From their viewpoint, they should really promote and release their own distro. Then they could really make it suck big time, with lots of bugs and as little hardware support as possible. But make it work good enough that they could put some subtle advertisement for Windows in it.

That way, they could really make a huge impact on the perception that Linux doesn't work as well as Windows, and really reinforce people's commitment to Windows.

[handy]

I don't think that they would want to risk enlarging the population that know what GNU/Linux is.

If they made a bad distro, they would also have put a great deal of money into advertising their Linux distro.

I think that they would loose paying customers.

They could get corporate entities to buy support as per Red Hat, but no way they want desktop users migrating from windows to Linux.

Their Linux users would find out about all of the other free distro's & the great support available on forums, which sure beats the guy on the other end of the phone asking if you have rebooted the machine yet?

[themarker0]

Not quoting posts so just deal with what i have to say

At the talent remarks- They have talent. As i said in my post, their management and set goals don't allow them to showcase it.

At the crappy distro- If they just purely used there devs, i agree, they would have to take on some experienced linux devs.

Edit: A community driven OS from Microsoft would be pretty good imho.

[aysiu]

If Microsoft did create its own Linux distro or made Windows to use the Linux kernel instead of NT, all they would do is plop a bunch of proprietary components on top of it.

So instead of Gnome or KDE, you'd get a closed source desktop environment. You may not even get the X window system but some other way to get graphics going.

Using Linux does not mean the whole operating system is open source. Look at Android, for example. Yes, the basic operating system is open source, but in order for it to be usable, you have to include all these Google-branded proprietary apps. That's why there was that whole cease and desist fiasco with regard to a particular Android rom (http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntucat/why-im-not-a-fan-of-googles-cease-and-desist-letter-to-cyanogen/).

Apple includes a lot of open source components (with varying licenses, GPL, LGPL, BSD) but the truth is that in order to get the Mac OS X operating system useful, you have to include the proprietary Apple components or just write the whole thing from scratch yourself.

The huge advantage to Linux users if Microsoft did make this move, though, would be more hardware support from manufacturers, since Windows using a Linux kernel would mean all the major hardware drivers would be Linux drivers. So even if you didn't use the Windows version of Linux, you could use any other Linux distro and benefit from the Microsoft-dominated consumer computing ecosystem.

[swoll1980]

OpenSuse looks like any other linux distro.

Oh no you deh-int

[cammin]

The huge advantage to Linux users if Microsoft did make this move, though, would be more hardware support from manufacturers, since Windows using a Linux kernel would mean all the major hardware drivers would be Linux drivers. So even if you didn't use the Windows version of Linux, you could use any other Linux distro and benefit from the Microsoft-dominated consumer computing ecosystem.

Assuming they didn't bury the drivers under an incompatible or proprietary layer.






Oh no you deh-int

I totally beat you to it.