I'm not so sure. The article starts by stating MS does not have the resources to properly support Windows any more. And the solution is to roll their own linux distro?
Also, NT, the Windows kernel, is actually pretty good. Is that the bit MS will swap out?
Also also, for better or worse, Windows is famously backwards compatible. Will they throw all that out?
>Also also, for better or worse, Windows is famously backwards compatible. Will they throw all that out?
Sure, why not? Because after all, Windows is not actually backwards compatible; it's why they have something call "WoW" (Windows on Windows). Basically, when you run older Windows software, you're not running it natively, you're running it through a compatibility layer, exactly how "WINE" works in Linux.
Doing the same thing in Linux would be mostly trivial, since WINE already exists, and they could even improve it since they own all the important DLLs.
>Also, NT, the Windows kernel, is actually pretty good. Is that the bit MS will swap out?
It is? How so? It's tied to a crappy and obsolete filesystem, and its device driver support isn't that great since it relies on vendors a lot still, rather than being under MS's control. Perhaps the scheduler is nice, I dunno, but there's a lot more to a kernel than that, and I'd say filesystems and drivers are the most important parts, and parts where MS is behind Linux.
Also, NT, the Windows kernel, is actually pretty good. Is that the bit MS will swap out?
Also also, for better or worse, Windows is famously backwards compatible. Will they throw all that out?
But who knows, stranger things have happened.