
Windows systems set to be merged by Microsoft - AndrewDucker
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-28440288
======
ayi
I know microsoft bashing is all the rage but something has been lost in
translation here. What Satya Nadella meant was Microsoft will ship windows on
different form factors (tablets, phones, PCs, servers etc) from the same code-
base.

The OS kernel will more or less be the same. However the UI experience will be
vastly different as you can image.

Mary Jo Foley explains it well here - [http://www.zdnet.com/what-one-windows-
really-means-and-doesn...](http://www.zdnet.com/what-one-windows-really-means-
and-doesnt-7000031917/)

~~~
equoid
But it will only be the same code base to a manager or bean-counter. There
will so much conditional code and special casing that maintenance will be a
nightmare. Fix things for system, break the others. (Or "same code base" just
means all stored with in the same repository.)

Same old Microsoft, same old mistakes.

~~~
keithwarren
Have you actually built a universal app? There is actually quite a good
pattern for the separation of concerns here, you should check it out.

spoiler: It is not like what you are thinking, quite clean actually.

------
geertj
From the article:

> [It] gives developers the entire volume of Windows, which is 300 plus
> million units as opposed to just our 4% share of mobile in the US or 10% in
> some countries

Great strategy, nothing new or visionary, but something tried and tested. Use
your strength in one market to enter a new one. From my (much more modest)
experience at Red Hat, I know this can work.

~~~
higherpurpose
Apps will still need to be modified for the smaller or bigger screens, and I
doubt the APIs will be exactly the same either. Plus, this will only apply for
_new_ "WinRT apps" and only to Windows 9 devices. So maybe it won't be 4
percent, but it will be 14 percent, at most, like what they have now in
"computing devices" as market share.

------
caruana
What i'm really hoping to see is a phone that can have a keyboard, mouse and
monitor attached to it. When that happens then Windows Phone UX turns into
Windows Desktop UX on the monitor. Or a laptop with a dock for my phone ...
???

~~~
sp332
What's stopping you from using a keyboard, mouse, and external monitor with
your phone now?

~~~
WorldWideWayne
Connecting the keyboard, mouse and monitor was only the first part. The second
part had to do with the Desktop UX becoming available on the external monitor.

Those peripherals are not as useful with any mobile OS as they would be with
full Windows.

------
tinco
Wasn't this the whole idea of Windows 8, why is it news now?

~~~
jiggy2011
Microsoft previously had Win8 , RT and Windows Phone. The latter two needed to
be distinct because they were ARM based so there would be software
compatibility issues with software that was developed for Win8.

The plan here seems to be to build all Windows phones and tablets with x86
chips to eliminate that issue.

~~~
personZ
_The plan here seems to be to build all Windows phones and tablets with x86
chips to eliminate that issue._

That was an analyst guessing, not Microsoft setting a strategy. It is
extraordinarily doubtful that Microsoft would go all in on x86 like that, and
it would be somewhat archaic if they did.

I would surmise that Microsoft is speaking from a development/management
perspective. If WinRT had all of the APIs available in Win32/64, for instance,
whether it's ARM or MIPS or AMD64 shouldn't really matter that much for cross-
targeting apps like Office (which I doubt has much assembly in it): If the
compiler supports it, it's an option.

And from an internal perspective we know from a post yesterday that they laid
off a Windows test engineer, probably because their plan going forward is that
the major services (and obviously teams) of all of the platforms combine,
which makes a lot of sense. Instead of teams forking off bits of Windows and
then creating their own silos, it makes sense that the active development copy
of many subsystems for all of the products is shared live.

~~~
jiggy2011
But surely anything else would be a disaster from a messaging point of view
considering that the Windows lineup is already confusing enough as it is.
Unless you can somehow force developers to produce binaries for all platforms
and have that include all legacy applications which is doubtful.

~~~
personZ
If it supported the same APIs, a platform encountering native code from
another platform could simply do binary translation (where simply means
"enormously complex and difficult, but a solved problem"). This is exactly
what x86 Android phones do when they encounter APKs with native ARM and no
equivalent x86, via Intel's "Houdini" solution: The performance is actually
surprisingly good, and far exceeds most expectations. And of course Microsoft
could do this en masse in their application store.

And really, if cross compiling a rich desktop application was simply a matter
of picking a different target configuration in Visual Studio, everyone would
target ARM(v8) as well, because it costs close to nothing. As is, however,
that is not the case- WinRT is a very special snowflake, with a subset API.
Even if you went purely virtualized with .NET, you _still_ have the special
restrictions and constraints of WinRT that mean that you have to generally
specifically develop for it.

Microsoft is in such a strange place. Well over a decade ago they tried to
move everything to higher layers, abstracting themselves from the underlying
hardware. Today they seem to be in a worse place that they even were then.

~~~
jiggy2011
Wouldn't that necessitate all phones to ship with complete Win32 API (complete
with all backwards compatibility stuff) as well as the translation software, I
can't imagine what that would do to battery life, let alone storage.

~~~
personZ
The binary translation happens on install of apps, and unused APIs consume no
CPU time.

As for storage, if a unified platform supported every legacy API, the same
problem exists whether it is x86 or ARM, so that seems orthogonal to this
discussion. Regardless it's worth considering how mobile and tablet devices
have exploded in capabilities (my smartphone has 2GB of RAM. Windows XP
required 64MB).

Would it support every legacy API? Not necessarily. Being unified doesn't
necessarily mean that, and Microsoft has threatened Win32 and friends for time
eternal (e.g.
[http://www.windowsdevcenter.com/pub/a/windows/2004/07/13/win...](http://www.windowsdevcenter.com/pub/a/windows/2004/07/13/winfx.html)).
Unified can simply mean that from this point forward, WinXX is unified, or the
.NET platform is holistic and all-encompassing (which has always been the goal
of that platform, but somehow keeps getting screwed up), or whatever.

~~~
jiggy2011
I was thinking more of trying to translate an entire heavyish weight x86
application on a mobile phone, probably not pleasant.

You're right that the API issue is basically orthogonal, but I can't see how
this could be done without having either a very bloated phone OS or an overly
restricted desktop OS.

------
BigChiefSmokem
With the delays to x86 (Broadwell, Skylake) I don't see how they can
completely abandon ARM. Is Microsoft really doubling down on Intel now? Do we
really think x86 will ever overtake ARM as the de facto mobile platform? Just
because Microsoft's ARM-based products are all flops doesn't mean ARM is dead
for other manufacturers and software makers.

Anyone care to fill in some blanks for me as to why Microsoft is so embolden
now? What is Intel up to?

------
billpg
Does "One for PCs" cover both servers and desktops?

~~~
kyllo
This is a smartass comment, but it cuts right to the core of Microsoft's
foolishness. They are still out fighting a battle against Apple for mobile,
which they lost a long time ago, meanwhile their enterprise stronghold is
under seige.

------
el_duderino
I just hope they do away with the stupid ass start screen for their Server OS.
It doesn't belong there no matter what any one says. It belongs on PC (I
guess) systems and touchscreen devices.

And before you jump on me about "use server core you moron", that's not
feasible in my environment. We have users who cannot solely rely on powershell
to do most of their day to day work flows.

------
popeshoe
Sounds like they're really doubling down on their devices that could never
have succeeded because they were too late.

I kinda wish I could have been in the meeting where they decided that windows
8 should be the same for all their different devices, it sounds kind of
appealing at first, 'One experience for mobile, tablet and desktop' until you
think about it for a second.

~~~
higherpurpose
When you have to "double down" on something, it usually means you're doing to
wrong thing.

------
chris_wot
I wonder if Cortana works as well as it seems to in that video?

~~~
Rakathos
As someone that has a Windows Phone and uses Cortana, yes. Everything he was
doing is a pretty standard response or action from Cortana.

I mention this every time, but I think the most interesting thing about it is
that developers can integrate their apps with it. For example, you could open
Cortana and say "Send a Yo to John Doe" or "GenericBankingApp, transfer $25 to
my checking account".

I've been meaning to sit down and build a couple small apps that take
advantage of this, but I haven't gotten around to it yet.

------
nick_riviera
Do we really want unification across those platforms?

Not joking but x86 on phones doesn't work either.

More suckery to come...

~~~
Eyas
Unifying team/platform and APIs is not the same as unifying the architecture.
Windows on ARM, for instance, was previously 'unified' with Windows 8 on the
x86/64\. To the best of my knowledge Microsoft is referring to the former.

------
mkesper
As they wanted to turn every PC into a tablet with Win8, do they want to turn
it into a phone now?

~~~
rvschuilenburg
I think they could use responsive design?

------
higherpurpose
So now Windows phones will require tons of storage just for itself, and a high
powered Intel processor, too?

------
jqm
They still are not getting it.

It's like an auto manufacturer trying to standardize controls between a
corvette and a dump truck. No... both of those are different machines with
different use cases. They need to have unique user interfaces.

~~~
pilsetnieks
User interface is just one part of an OS. You can have the same OS on
different devices with different interfaces.

~~~
jqm
No you can't.

Sure, the kernel may be the same but you say it very clearly yourself....
"user interface is part of the OS". So you can't have the "same" OS with
different interfaces.

Nor for that matter can the apps be the same. They would work differently.

Edit: I didn't catch the user interface would differ among devices in the
article, so I suppose my original complaint about user interface has been
addressed. Developers still have to address how people will interact in
different ways with their applications among platforms however... even if the
binaries compile on all.

~~~
freehunter
So when pilsetnieks says the user interface can be different on the same OS,
which is the whole basis of Linux and also damn close to how Apple does it
with OSX and iOS, it "can't be done". Then you read the exact same thing in
the article, and suddenly it can be done.

You posted above in this thread "Maybe complaining about some of Microsoft's
decisions has more to do with user frustration and less to do with being "all
the rage"?"

Maybe you need to rethink the reasons why you're complaining right now.
Because you have a legitimate complaint? No. Because it's fashionable? I think
that's closer to the truth.

~~~
jqm
"reasons why you're complaining right now.." -Please don't presume to ascribe
me motive. That's just silly.

"can't be done" -Where do I even vaguely reference that something can't be
done? Did you even read my comment? Sure... The underlying kernel is the same.
I understand. I also understand now, (after reading the top comment) that it
is kernel changes referenced in the article rather than UI. My complaint is
with standardized UI so that complaint is irrelevant (which I note). But,
according to pilsetniek, an OS encompasses UI. So if you have have a different
UI, by his definition, then you have a different OS. Very simple logic 101.

Speaking of motive, I'm not going to presume to ascribe motive to your
comment, but I have to wonder about it. It doesn't seem to have been worth the
time taken to post it as you didn't address the content of my comments. More
like an attempted jab that falls short. Why? I don't know. My psychology
degree hasn't come in the mail yet.

And yes.. I believe frustration with some of Microsoft's decisions results in
complaints.

~~~
freehunter
>No you can't.

>you can't have the "same" OS with different interfaces

Also, if I'm running Ubuntu and I apt-get install xfce, I still have the same
OS, but the UI is completely different. All the same applications still work,
and they adapt to the new UI.

So yeah, you're bitching just to bitch. Did you complain 20 years ago when
Linux decided to have one OS regardless of what UI package you decided to use?
Hell, I just switched my Windows 7 UI to classic mode. Does that mean I'm
running a different OS now? Man, I hope my applications still work.

OH NO! The time on my clock changed, now I'm running a different OS... very
simple logic 101.

~~~
jqm
A clock changing time or switching to classic mode on Windows is in no way
analogous to the difference between a phone, a desktop and an Xbox.

Those systems are substantially different enough to require different methods
of user interaction. Do they utilize the same OS at that point? Maybe,
depending on definition. But the definition given by pilsetniek specifies UI
as part of the OS. So by this definition, No, they cannot use the same OS.

"you are bitching because..."

Whatever dude.

------
tdsamardzhiev
Great! We may finally have an <actually useful> phone OS.

------
yulaow
I just fear that the dimension of the full os once installed will be absurd.
Win8 is already 13-15 gb alone... If they try to put on the new windows also
all the features needed for phones the situation can become really bad.

At that point can be needed at least 24gb of intern memory on the phones to
just run wp

~~~
SideburnsOfDoom
I don't think that's how it will work at all. Android phones run on a Linux
kernel, does that mean that an android phone needs to install a full linux
distribution comparable to Ubuntu or Debian? No.

~~~
yulaow
In that case the title of the article is wrong. Are we talking about have a
single kernel on all platform or a single os on all platform?

~~~
Eyas
Its about Kernel and API unity and sharing components. It was clarified in an
above thread that "One Windows" is an organizational statement rather than an
OS flavor or even SKU.

