>threw their weight behind the Linux kernel (or if GNU is too restrictive
The GPL isn't too restrictive. Google has no issue with it on Android (which uses a modified Linux kernel). GPL doesn't mean you have to open-source everything, just the GPL components, which in the case of the Linux kernel, is just the kernel itself. MS already contributes a bunch of drivers (for their hypervisor) to the Linux kernel. They could easily make a Linux-based OS with their own proprietary crap on top if they wanted to.
>support for Android apps without emulation
They wouldn't need CPU-level emulation, but the API would need some kind of compatibility layer, similar to how WINE serves this purpose for Windows applications on Linux.
>Microsoft could build Windows on top of that POSIX kernel and provide a compatibility layer for NT calls and Win32 APIs.
They don't need to: they can just use WINE. They could improve that, or maybe fork it and add some proprietary parts like CodeWeavers does, or they could even just buy out CodeWeavers.
The GPL isn't too restrictive. Google has no issue with it on Android (which uses a modified Linux kernel). GPL doesn't mean you have to open-source everything, just the GPL components, which in the case of the Linux kernel, is just the kernel itself. MS already contributes a bunch of drivers (for their hypervisor) to the Linux kernel. They could easily make a Linux-based OS with their own proprietary crap on top if they wanted to.
>support for Android apps without emulation
They wouldn't need CPU-level emulation, but the API would need some kind of compatibility layer, similar to how WINE serves this purpose for Windows applications on Linux.
>Microsoft could build Windows on top of that POSIX kernel and provide a compatibility layer for NT calls and Win32 APIs.
They don't need to: they can just use WINE. They could improve that, or maybe fork it and add some proprietary parts like CodeWeavers does, or they could even just buy out CodeWeavers.