Windows 10 support for things is fantastic. It's faster than Mac OS X and Linux for me. It multitasks better. The HDPI support is very mature compared to Windows 7/8. Multi-monitors just work. I love snapping windows (via corners and hot keys). Also Windows Key + Shift + S to click+drag screenshots to clipboard.
Everything just works. Or the driver is a Google away. Wireless printers and scanners. Bluetooth headphones. Apps like slack, trello, spotify.
While I haven't used the Surface, I was considering one for development, but the repairability on the Surface Book 2 (if that's what you mean) is worse than the Macbook Pro: https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Microsoft+Surface+Book+2+Tea...
On the other hand, Windows 10 "just works" on a lot of hardware. I recommend Lenovo X and T series. Dell XPS series are getting good reviews.
WSL: I'm running webpack via npm, postgres, django and flask. I keep the project files in the windows layer and symlink it into WSL. I turn off Defender because it's the only way to work. WSL is far too slow for me to use Defender on.
Despite that, I turn a lot of call home stuff off. There's tons of telemetry stuff that adds no value. I tried W10Privacy and OOSU10 for it. I wish Microsoft would just add a button to turn all the cloud cruft/call home stuff off.
There is a nasty issue where running rm -rf node_modules that can cause the system to freeze. So go into explorer to remove that with shift+delete. Sometimes I still have to restart.
Microsoft has won a lot of confidence from me with Windows 10, VSCode, and WSL.
Whatever approach they choose, I'm confident they have the ability to ship a Linux distro that runs Windows apps well. It would certainly be a lot easier than going the other direction (Linux compatibility in Windows).
Doing so might give them a more attractive offering for the future while retaining most of the Windows legacy business. It would also let them leave lots of legacy problems behind, and pick up a lot of the "real desktop computer for real work" business that Apple is pushing away in its own gradual transition to the "controlled purchasing portal" OS they love.
My thinking is mainly that while windows is still a little behind MacOS for some things, it's headed in the right direction, and MacOS is heading the other way. The hardware is superior in almost every way to what I was looking at in a MBP (my windows machine is a SB2), only complaints are about the location of the headphone jack, and the fact that the rubber "feet" on the bottom of the laptop have come unglued, which does kinda suck.
As another osx refugee, I've spent time on both Windows and Linux. There's no "just" Linux, it has plenty of its own annoyances - to be honest it's a bit of a wash between it and Windows for me. WSL 2 could push me back.
You may have some odd hardware issues with discrete GPUs and some other devices (I'm looking at you, Lenovo, and your gorgeous e-ink keyboard I want so much), but if you stay within the basics, there's no reason to assume Linux won't work with it.
Things take longer, and don't work out of the box.
I LOVE Ubuntu Server though, fav of all time.
Specifics here would be valuable input.
I'm a linux user, so terminal isnt a big deal, but Ubuntu is no windows.
ClearType is shockingly bad. However, I remember that when I was a teenager I absolutely adored ClearType. But then I hadn't been exposed to other font rendering systems.
Windows may change to accomodate hiDPI displays, but it make take a decade or more given how Microsoft prioritizes backward compatibility, and most computers in the wild have low resolution screens.
MacOS had always optimized for typeface fidelity, and the results were blurry on low resolution screens, although you got used to it pretty quickly. But now with Retina screens that problem has been solved. Whereas Windows used a hack (ClearType) to make type more readable at the expense of fidelity, and now it can't use high resolution screens to the fullest because now applications assume certain things about font rendering. There's a lesson to be learned here about sticking to your values and software design, but I don't know what it is exactly.
Dell, Razer and Lenovo's laptops have stagnated over the last few years. Huawei + Microsoft seem to be the ones with the freshest new offerings, but I am not buying a Huawei product.
So, I am hoping Microsoft delivers.
A BSD or Mach kernel, perhaps -- that's been done successfully already on the desktop. Linux? No chance.
Mine has handled every programming, design, and editing I've ever needed.
Btw, I just Virtual Machine or SSH my linux boxes.
There is, for laptop/desktop: almost all of those run a Windows kernel thus most money for laptop/desktop device driver support is going towards supporting the Windows kernel. Technically... it's a difficult discussion but it's irrelevant. Noone is running a bare kernel.
Microsoft itself called the NT 3.1 kernel a "macrokernel". https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions//cc750820...
If you look at the Other Wiki, you will find even Mac OS is not a microkernel. http://wiki.c2.com/?MicroKernel
> XNU is not a MicroKernel, it is a kernel obtained by merging the Mach MicroKernel with parts of the BSD kernel and parts specific to Darwin, all running in kernel space.
OKL4 is the most widely deployed pure microkernel in Qualcomm phone modems and Apple's Secure Enclave coprocessor. It is possible OKL4 is the most widespread OS, in fact.
Oh there is. Like pervasive ACLs on all kernel objects, e.g., processes. User-ids (SIDs) based on a distributed authority model rather than a simple int. Then there's asynchronous IO that's still not usable in Linux. Etc, etc...
Plus, word on the street is Microsoft's motivation to move to Chromium was totally different to that: it was a performance decision. Too many apps were using Electron, and the only way to improve their performance was to intregrate it into the OS.
>Plus, word on the street is
Come on, don't just start spewing a bunch of weasel words. It's fine if you disagree me and I won't downvote you if you do (I never downvote people for that reason) but at least put some effort into it.
> Too many apps were using Electron, and the only way to improve their performance was to intregrate it into the OS.
Well why wouldn't they just build out the Edge backend to be compatible with node.js to natively support the Electron API? Because it a waste of time and R&D money when Chromium does all that already and more with minimal cost. Why reinvent the wheel when you can get a run-flat radial tire for free?
There are 1,000 privately developed and privately run Windows apps for every publicly available application, and those private applications are the backbone of businesses around the world. A Linux kernel would render a VERY large portion of those inoperable, even with WINE.
A Windows with a Linux kernel will never replace traditional Windows. Some Microsoft OS may live alongside traditional Windows, at some point however, and it is unlikely to be Linux at all.
There are lots of kernel architectures out there besides the ones that Linux and Windows use.
No. We "talk" to the kernel through an ABI, not an API. Maintaining ABI compatibility is important because you can move a binary from one kernel version to another without recompiling and relinking your app.