[NEWS] The Microsoft Singularity - new O/S

Mr.Guvernment · Nov 4, 2005

slashdot

Is MS realizing their current base for an o/S is becoming fast obsolete? Could this have to do with OS X for intel ?

+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The Microsoft Singularity |
| from the dependability-would-be-nice dept. |
| posted by CmdrTaco on Thursday November 03, @13:33 (Operating Sys|
| http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/03/1744230 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

[0]jose parinas writes ""Microsoft Research has published the first details of a wholly new operating system under development called [1]Singularity, designed new from the ground up, built on a new language and designed with emphasis on [2]dependability instead of performance.""

Discuss this story at:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=05/11/03/1744230

Links:
0. http://www.darksideprogramming.org/
1. http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity/
2. http://www.darksideprogramming.net/2005/11/the_singularity_operating_syst.html#more

Captain Newbie · Nov 4, 2005

They probably are scared ****less at OSX, even if it won't be 'runnable' on normally aspirated x86 machines.

Singularity...extend, embrace, and extinguish...

Mr.Guvernment · Nov 4, 2005

hehe

yeah - i would certainly be somewhat concerned about OS X - i mean now that is it going to the x86 line, and future intel architectures - i am sure it may be alot easier to program applications for it to be just as wide spread as PC's and that includes games

This is kind of crappy with Vista coming out - supposed to be this NEW line of an O/S and now they are considering another one.

MRD · Nov 4, 2005

Apple is making the same mistake they made years ago, the mistake which allowed M$ to dominate the PC market.

Apple is again preventing people from copying their hardware by making it so OSX will only run on genuine Macs. They made Macs impossible to clone back in the early 80's, and as a result, IBM won the standards war despite Apple's superior product.

If they were smart, they'd let OSX run on all x86 PC's. Then OSX might really give M$ a run for its money. Make it so you can dual boot and a lot of people would play with OSX. I know I would.

MRD · Nov 4, 2005

No, that's called "Bill Gates"

Captain Newbie · Nov 4, 2005

^^ Or "Paul Allen". But I'm glad that they use some of it to build computer science buildings at universities.

nikhsub1 · Nov 4, 2005

MRD said:
If they were smart, they'd let OSX run on all x86 PC's. Then OSX might really give M$ a run for its money. Make it so you can dual boot and a lot of people would play with OSX. I know I would.

Exactly. And furthermore, Apple finatics will still buy Apple computers, no matter how much they overcharge for them

Captain Newbie · Nov 4, 2005

Some of us probably won't be buying Apple anymore, since x86 is technically inferior to PPC, and the only thing keeping us buying Apple was the technically superior PowerPC.

nikhsub1 · Nov 4, 2005

Captain Newbie said:
Some of us probably won't be buying Apple anymore, since x86 is technically inferior to PPC, and the only thing keeping us buying Apple was the technically superior PowerPC.

I beg to differ, but whatever. Notice how Apple can not produce a G5 laptop?

MRD · Nov 4, 2005

I don't think you can really claim x86 or PPC is superior. This is the age old debate of CISC vs RISC, and it has no simple answer.

It's more a matter of market share than superior/inferior technologies. Often the technology that wins the war is not the best but the the best marketed.

Captain Newbie · Nov 4, 2005

nikhsub1 said:
I beg to differ, but whatever. Notice how Apple can not produce a G5 laptop?

Yeah, mostly because the G5 is a desktop processor :roll:

*I* happen to like PPC and reduced instruction set computing more than I do x86's complex (very) instruction set computing, but the differences these days are very little because of the absolute explosion of processor speeds on both sides.

pejsaboy · Nov 4, 2005

MRD said:
If they were smart, they'd let OSX run on all x86 PC's. Then OSX might really give M$ a run for its money. Make it so you can dual boot and a lot of people would play with OSX. I know I would.

I second that. i used macs with OSX for a semester while taking a beginning Flash course, and my best friend has had a g5 for about a year. OSX rocks and i would gladly adopt it on my rig as a dual boot. as far as that goes, i'd let it replace windows if there was a larger selection of games for OSX

bLack0ut · Nov 5, 2005

I'm slightly confused, does this mean Apple will cease manufacturing of their own brand of hardware/computer and market OSX on x86 only, or are they just making the OS x86 compatible? And why didnt they do this before?

9mmCensor · Nov 5, 2005

Captain Newbie said:
Yeah, mostly because the G5 is a desktop processor :roll:

*I* happen to like PPC and reduced instruction set computing more than I do x86's complex (very) instruction set computing, but the differences these days are very little because of the absolute explosion of processor speeds on both sides.

No, its because the G5 procs run too damn hot to put in a portable.

Captain Newbie · Nov 5, 2005

...and, consequently, are relegated to desktop processing applications where heat is (mostly) not a factor.

David · Nov 5, 2005

If Apple make OSX available for all x86 PCs then no-one will buy their hardware. Bye bye Apple.

tenchi86 · Nov 5, 2005

They are a huge business, they are always looking for new ways to attract and keep customers. Personally I think this is awsome, though I hope it dosn't take 10 years to come out.

Mr.Guvernment · Nov 7, 2005

David said:
If Apple make OSX available for all x86 PCs then no-one will buy their hardware. Bye bye Apple.

Apple doesnt make the hardware.

ATI NVIDIA / IBM / Intel etc etc make the hardware - they just toss it all in a purdy case, slap on a nice O/S and call it a MAC.

the only thing Apple has over PC's is the OS really in terms of speed and stability - all the hardware you can get / already get for a PC in a much larger selection as well the CPU of a MAC has been debated on what is faster - one thing you will notice is that almost ALL Apple's CPU comparisons are always against Intel - you will rarely see AMD in the mix - especially when their G5 came out - it was always "Apple is faster then intel" and only intel CPU's in their comparisons - never AMD, now why would that be ?....

mmmmmmmmmmm

Now that Apple is goign x86 route, if they do open up to more 3rd party companies for hardware / software - i dont think OS X or what ever will be out will just as fast and stable as it was and they will now know why Windows gets bashed so much - for crappy 3rd party programming.

9mmCensor · Nov 7, 2005

David said:
If Apple make OSX available for all x86 PCs then no-one will buy their hardware. Bye bye Apple.

No. People would still buy thier hardware.

Apple people will continue to buy it because its cool, looks nice, they are fan boys, it is trendy, they have the money, they dont want the hassel, and because Apple Tech Support is great.

-maddog- · Nov 7, 2005

Apples are dependable, look sweet, has great interface graphics, is a major resoruce hog, and are very exspensive and lack program support. Windows is unreliable, is faster, has huge software support, cheaper, more hardware, and has just enough graphics to hog recources; but not look good. The only thing that keeps apple alive since money is a major factor in a pc for most people is looks good and is more dependable.

[NEWS] The Microsoft Singularity - new O/S

Member

Senior Django-loving Member

Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Django-loving Member

Unoriginal Macho Moderator

Senior Django-loving Member

Unoriginal Macho Moderator

Senior Member

Senior Django-loving Member

Member

Member

Disabled

Senior Django-loving Member

Forums Super Moderator

Member

Member

Disabled

Member

Similar threads