Linux in Windows XP?
-
Rickard Andersson wrote: But that wouldn't public know... Heeey... we're talking about Microsoft! LOL Well yes they would, as they had to hand over the source code as part of the anti-trust trial, and they also have a shared source parnering program. And as I said, it't not using the Linux Kernal, becuase they behave differently though the behavour of the core kernal - the process/thread sheduler.
Giles wrote: becuase they behave differently though the behavour of the core kernal - the process/thread sheduler. Not to mention the file subsystem, graphics subsystem (not found in Linux), device driver interface, device model, etc.. There isn't much similar between them two besides abstract OS-notions. -- standing so tall, the ground behind no trespassers, on every floor a garden swing, and another door she makes it clear, that everything is hers A place of abode, not far from here, Ms. Van de Veer
-
Giles wrote: Ooo, but hey, maybe Microsft stole the code for Solaris. Maybe they bought the technology from Sun, and refuse to acknowledge it? Maybe Microsoft traded Suns secret threads for Java. MMhmm.. I smell a conspiracy here. Wouldn't you want to know what the real fight between Sun and Microsoft is all about? :cool: -- standing so tall, the ground behind no trespassers, on every floor a garden swing, and another door she makes it clear, that everything is hers A place of abode, not far from here, Ms. Van de Veer
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Maybe they bought the technology from Sun hey, do you really think so? I mean, if they had, the world would know through all media! :-D Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
-
1. The Linux core is free. 2. Windows XP is a very stable OS (many says). 3. Hm... what if Windows XP has some "stable code" from the Linux core? :suss: We can't know... We can't figure out... We can only trust! Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
Rickard Andersson wrote: 1. The Linux core is free. Sadly the restrictions that come with it can hardly be called 'free'. Rickard Andersson wrote: 3. Hm... what if Windows XP has some "stable code" from the Linux core? Windows and Linux are two different products, both are written differently. It would be impossible to transport code between them without a major rewrite. XP is based upon the NT Kernal and related code. NT was written by a bunch of coders hired from Digital. This is the reason why XP is more stable than it's DOS based 9x counterparts. By claiming that Windows XP has Linux code is an insult to all the developers who've worked hard to make NT the most stable 'popular' OS in the world. Rickard Andersson wrote: We can't know... We can't figure out... We can only trust! Perhaps you'd feel more at home at SlashDot. Michael Life’s not a song. Life isn’t bliss. Life is just this. It’s living. -- Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once more, with feeling
-
Rickard Andersson wrote: 1. The Linux core is free. Sadly the restrictions that come with it can hardly be called 'free'. Rickard Andersson wrote: 3. Hm... what if Windows XP has some "stable code" from the Linux core? Windows and Linux are two different products, both are written differently. It would be impossible to transport code between them without a major rewrite. XP is based upon the NT Kernal and related code. NT was written by a bunch of coders hired from Digital. This is the reason why XP is more stable than it's DOS based 9x counterparts. By claiming that Windows XP has Linux code is an insult to all the developers who've worked hard to make NT the most stable 'popular' OS in the world. Rickard Andersson wrote: We can't know... We can't figure out... We can only trust! Perhaps you'd feel more at home at SlashDot. Michael Life’s not a song. Life isn’t bliss. Life is just this. It’s living. -- Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once more, with feeling
Michael P Butler wrote: Windows and Linux are two different products, both are written differently. It would be impossible to transport code between them without a major rewrite. XP is based upon the NT Kernal and related code. NT was written by a bunch of coders hired from Digital. This is the reason why XP is more stable than it's DOS based 9x counterparts. By claiming that Windows XP has Linux code is an insult to all the developers who've worked hard to make NT the most stable 'popular' OS in the world. All applications can't run on WinXP that can run on before Windows versions, right? I've even tried it! I've tried an application that did run on Win2000 and the newer versions of the 9x series. But it did not run on XP! Why?... did I had to do something or was it XP that said "No, this will not run on me!"... Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
-
Michael P Butler wrote: Windows and Linux are two different products, both are written differently. It would be impossible to transport code between them without a major rewrite. XP is based upon the NT Kernal and related code. NT was written by a bunch of coders hired from Digital. This is the reason why XP is more stable than it's DOS based 9x counterparts. By claiming that Windows XP has Linux code is an insult to all the developers who've worked hard to make NT the most stable 'popular' OS in the world. All applications can't run on WinXP that can run on before Windows versions, right? I've even tried it! I've tried an application that did run on Win2000 and the newer versions of the 9x series. But it did not run on XP! Why?... did I had to do something or was it XP that said "No, this will not run on me!"... Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
Rickard Andersson wrote: All applications can't run on WinXP that can run on before Windows versions, right? I've even tried it! I've tried an application that did run on Win2000 and the newer versions of the 9x series. But it did not run on XP! Why?... did I had to do something or was it XP that said "No, this will not run on me!"... It is usually the badly written apps or applications that used un-documented calls that fail on newer OS. Microsoft work hard to make Windows backward compatabile. That is one of the reasons XP has the compatability modes so that XP can pretend to be 2000 or 98. Michael Life’s not a song. Life isn’t bliss. Life is just this. It’s living. -- Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once more, with feeling
-
Rickard Andersson wrote: All applications can't run on WinXP that can run on before Windows versions, right? I've even tried it! I've tried an application that did run on Win2000 and the newer versions of the 9x series. But it did not run on XP! Why?... did I had to do something or was it XP that said "No, this will not run on me!"... It is usually the badly written apps or applications that used un-documented calls that fail on newer OS. Microsoft work hard to make Windows backward compatabile. That is one of the reasons XP has the compatability modes so that XP can pretend to be 2000 or 98. Michael Life’s not a song. Life isn’t bliss. Life is just this. It’s living. -- Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once more, with feeling
Aaah! Thank you for that! BTW: it was an MFC program I tried.... i says all... :laugh: Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
-
Rickard Andersson wrote: 3. Hm... what if Windows XP has some "stable code" from the Linux core? Errr I would think not, becuase if this was the case then MS would be breaking the terms of the GPL, and be inquite a bit of trouble. Anyway XP is based on Win2k, which is based on NT4. And to kill your idea dead, the theading model is different to Linux. in fact the NT core has more in common with the Solaris threading model. Ooo, but hey, maybe Microsft stole the code for Solaris. :|
Giles wrote: which is based on NT4 Which was based on OS/2 (In fact, windows NT4 / 2000 / XP is meant to still be capable of running 16bit OS/2 apps - not that I've ever tried) -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
-
Giles wrote: which is based on NT4 Which was based on OS/2 (In fact, windows NT4 / 2000 / XP is meant to still be capable of running 16bit OS/2 apps - not that I've ever tried) -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
benjymous wrote: Which was based on OS/2 Not true. NT was written by Dave Cutler and co based upon work they had done at Digital. OS/2 was an IBM/MS co-production. When NT started looking good, MS trashed OS/2 development. For a rather fascinating read, I recommend the book "ShowStopper" which documents the development of NT. Michael Life’s not a song. Life isn’t bliss. Life is just this. It’s living. -- Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once more, with feeling
-
benjymous wrote: Which was based on OS/2 Not true. NT was written by Dave Cutler and co based upon work they had done at Digital. OS/2 was an IBM/MS co-production. When NT started looking good, MS trashed OS/2 development. For a rather fascinating read, I recommend the book "ShowStopper" which documents the development of NT. Michael Life’s not a song. Life isn’t bliss. Life is just this. It’s living. -- Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once more, with feeling
Well, there's certainly OS/2 (emulation?) code in Win2k (do a search in the help for OS/2) -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
-
Well, there's certainly OS/2 (emulation?) code in Win2k (do a search in the help for OS/2) -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
OS/2 emulation in NT was wanted by IBM. I think Microsoft agreed so that the "divorce" didn't turn messy. I think it was a half hearted job and suprised that the code still exists - not that I've got an OS/2 apps to test it against. Michael Life’s not a song. Life isn’t bliss. Life is just this. It’s living. -- Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once more, with feeling