I don't see that happening. Switching from the NT kernel to a *nix kernel would break compatibility with all existing windows applications. That's why the goal here is in virtualization.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Affix <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:affix@ihack.co.uk">affix@ihack.co.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
With microsoft contributing to the kernel does this mean we may see a<br>
unix based windows version. Personally I think windows should be unix<br>
based as with mac OSX it will greatly increase stability and security.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
On Tuesday, July 21, 2009, Nicolas Chauvet <<a href="mailto:kwizart@gmail.com">kwizart@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> 2009/7/21 Nicu Buculei <<a href="mailto:nicu_fedora@nicubunu.ro">nicu_fedora@nicubunu.ro</a>>:<br>
>> On 07/21/2009 12:04 PM, Keiran Smith wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> Well looks like us linux users can look forward to some of the<br>
>>> instabilities of windows in our Own Operating Systems. What are<br>
>>> microsoft thinking<br>
>><br>
>> I don't think you will be affected by this code unless you run a virtualized<br>
>> Linux guest on a Windows host and if you do that... well, probably you<br>
>> already have bigger problems :p<br>
> And that could be a problem for us, since the opposite (Windows on top<br>
> of linux) isn't that equivalent.<br>
> That's because of the hardware coverrage isn't the same. (3D graphics<br>
> / raid drivers / others).<br>
><br>
> One could say, it will be easier for Linux to live on top of windows.<br>
> That way drivers could remains closed sources and linux not a real OS<br>
> anymore, just providing few services on top of the real OS.<br>
><br>
> While the European Union is presuring to remove out IE from the next<br>
> windows bundle, /me think it would have been more valuable to only<br>
> keep the very basic hardware support layers from the OS, so everything<br>
> else could have been optional.<br>
><br>
> At least I can see one way to have the announcement turn into our<br>
> favour. It would be to have it compared with other opensourcing<br>
> announcement such the AMD/ATI one. Even if the reasons behind have<br>
> nothing to be compared, it could present theses as a success story for<br>
> the free software development scheme.<br>
> That should have be directed to end-users asking them to keep<br>
> presuring on hardware vendosr for free software solutions over<br>
> proprietary ones.<br>
><br>
> Nicolas (kwizart)<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Fedora-marketing-list mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Fedora-marketing-list@redhat.com">Fedora-marketing-list@redhat.com</a><br>
> <a href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list" target="_blank">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list</a><br>
><br>
<br>
</div></div><div class="im">--<br>
Keiran Smith<br>
- Fedora Ambassador / BugZapper - <<a href="mailto:affix@fedoraproject.org">affix@fedoraproject.org</a>><br>
- Free Software Foundation Associate - <<a href="mailto:keiran.smith@member.fsf.org">keiran.smith@member.fsf.org</a>><br>
- <a href="http://keiran-smith.net" target="_blank">http://keiran-smith.net</a><br>
- Call me on +44 (0) 131 208 4347<br>
<br>
</div><div><div></div><div class="h5">--<br>
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Fedora-marketing-list@redhat.com">Fedora-marketing-list@redhat.com</a><br>
<a href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list" target="_blank">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Kamin Horvath<br>Fedora Ambassadors USA<br><a href="http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mohaas05">http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mohaas05</a><br>