I genuinely don't understand the point of Windows as it exists anymore.
* Games are developed on cross platform engines. I can't remember the last game I played that was Windows-exclusive.
* Business apps work in the browser or Electron, or are otherwise cross-platform. Things that aren't, could work with emulation
* Developers are using unix-like operating systems, and MS has leaned hard into that. Windows is incongruent with the rest of their developer strategy.
* The server ecosystem is almost entirely Linux based, apparently even on Azure
* By all appearances, Windows is now a service that upsells other services, and there won't be a Windows 11 as we would traditionally think of it
* The people who know what an OS is, prefer unix-like OSes by a vast margin. The people who don't, wouldn't notice the difference.
* x86 looks even less like the future than it did a month ago
I think may be very much underestimating the number of line of business apps built as Windows GUIs over the last 30 years - not to mention server software running on IIS and similar.
I also think you're underestimating the number of developers who know Visual Studio and Windows and nothing else (many of whom are the so-called "dark matter" devs).
On top of this, the NT kernel is actually pretty decent - despite the horror of the Win32 API. Personally, I don't want to touch it though.
On top of this, the NT kernel is actually pretty decent
A lot of people that where not in computing back then do not realize that Microsoft picked up a lot of great people due to market forces, they picked up a lot of talent from DEC including David Cutler and the cream of the crop from the OS2 team. This was the team that designed and built the original NT Kernel and it was by and large the best parts of VMS and OS2 coupled with those individuals learnings in building those other systems. I agree with you on the Win32 API and it is a shame that the NT Kernel gets dinged for it.
The value of Windows is to run three decades of legacy Windows applications. (four decades of MS-DOS) Being able to run those still represents an actual (but declining) value.
Also the value of Intel is all that legacy software. Without the legacy software, Intel could be just another ARM or RISC V competitor.
Yeah - I'm not sure what GP is referring to, most new cross platform games that come out are xbox/ps/pc and very rarely will you see a linux or OS X release.
Microsoft Office is much better than the competition (including both LibreOffice and web apps like Google Docs). It's a great shame to say, but if I'm really honest with myself it's clear reality. Using Windows sucks, but Office is seriously so much better than everything else that it's worth it.
> * Games are developed on cross platform engines. I can't remember the last game I played that was Windows-exclusive.
To some, that's not a relevant fact. Consider someone like me who plays only one game that's only for Windows and consoles. It's never been released on Linux and I had a terrible experience playing under Wine.
I got a KVM switch to play it on my secondary PC. I think there are a lot of people out there for whom one game or one app doesn't work or only works poorly on Linux, and they keep a Windows PC or dual boot just for that.
This is me as well, for league of legends. It's the one game I and most of my friends play exclusively, and is how I keep in touch with the ones who live far away. I'll have a windows box around until league runs on Linux or dies, and not a day more or less.
Why is there Pepsi?
Coke Cola Classic has been the world best selling soft drink for over a decade and probably longe
People who want a Cola like drink prefer Coke.
Or even any other soft drinks than Cola derivates.
They sell the most by far.
Why does Dr Pepper exist? Or Club-Mate? Or Tøyen Cola.
There is a concept called competition.
People believe it drives innovation.
There is also nice to have variety and being able to pick
something you like the best form a selection.
A single operating system dominating the entire world from
PDP11 --> entirely is a bleak dystopia.
WindowsNT was lightyears ahead of Linux kernel when it come out.
Async everything from the start. Better protection for hardware.
Easily portable. x66, PowerPC, Alpha, Mips
Able to run win32, OS/2 and a posix layer that could be extended into
other adventures.
Also the most modern operating out there in wide use.
It sadly has retrograded over time.
Both WindowsNT, Linux and BSD are all unsuited for the world we live in now.
I can't wait until some sharp minds are able to create the next generation operating system.
It is taking far too long.
I loved the time of competition and variety
Atari TOS/GEM, MSDos, VAX, OS2, OS/400, Sintran, Mac OS (System 1.0 -->), AmigaOS, WindowsNT, many flavours of UNIX, Sinclair BASIC
Those are just alternate operating systemsI have used myself over a life.
I want far more flavours, ideas, alternatives out there, not less.
If the question is "is there something technical preventing Microsoft from pivoting to a *nix kernel instead of NT" the answer is "no, and there hasn't been for at least 20 years - if ever".
The switch from from DOS-based Windows to NT took place over many years: development started in 1989, the first release was in 1993 and the switch only really completed in 2001 when Windows XP was released, which was the first NT release targetted at consumers. That's well over a decade. Microsoft bet a huge amount of resources on NT because they could see that DOS was never going to work on in the long term, especially on servers. There's no reason for them to spend so much resources and time on a switch a *nix kernel when there's (currently) nothing like that at stake with the NT kernel.
Longhorn was the codename for Vista, which just used the same NT kernel as before (with some feature improvements, just like in every new Windows release).
Actually there were a couple of other reboots, but staying on the same NT kernel model, one being the kernel refactoring around Windows 7 release, and during Windows 10 it got the capabilities of split personality with secure kernel, driver guard and ability to run containers directly on top of Hyper-V.
I genuinely don't understand the point of Windows as it exists anymore.
So I don't understand what the holdup is?