On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 11:36:28PM -0600, michael hast wrote:
> chris lee wrote:
>
> >http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity/
> >
> >could this possibly be the fabled MS Linux?
> >
> M$ hasn't ever been reliable. Why should they start all of a sudden?
> If it is everything they say it is, they won't release it. Just like
> Detroit. They DIDN'T put a Wenkle-style rotary engine in the Corvette
> because they realized that it wouldn't wear out.
The Wankel rotary engine was used for many years in Mazdas (I don't
think it still is). It had two problems:
1) As implemented, the corners of the three-sided "armature" inside the
combustion chamber were made of carbon. These wore out over time.
Naturally, you'd have to tear down the whole engine to replace them.
This is based on some things I read many years ago, so I don't know if
they ever changed it.
2) The engine was very smoky. More pollution for a gasoline engine than
a standard inline or "V" engine.
> NASA can build a probe
> that can functionally fly through space for thirty years without human
> contact and yet we can't build a car that will out-do 150k miles without
> a struggle. It's called planned obsalecence. They won't release
> anything that's too good, because then, what's the incentive to buy the
> next one?
NASA probes don't have anywhere near the number of moving and lubricated
parts as automobiles. Most of the guts of NASA probes are electronic,
and any moving parts don't move near as much or as often as automobile
parts. And moving parts will always be the first to wear out. Actually,
I think cars are far more reliable now than they've ever been before
(your mileage may vary ;-).
I agree that Detroit would like to see cars last a single year, but
there's an opposing force there: consumer preference. If Detroit built a
one-year car, Japan or Germany would eat the American car market whole
by building cars that lasted longer. GM is ailing now because of
consumer perception that foreign cars are more reliable. So don't
discount the power of consumers versus the wishes of auto makers. Market
competition makes for better products.
Would Microsoft release a more reliable OS? You bet. Their huge code
base is decades old and crufty as hell. New versions of Windows are
always only incremental improvements because if they change things too
much, they'll break legacy applications right and left. You can't work
on their code and not realize what a lot of bad code and bad design is
in there. Apple has 5% of the market and fanatical users, so they can
afford to scrap OS9 and build a whole new OS (OSX) based on a Unix
kernel. Microsoft has 90% of the market; they can't afford problems. So
they come out with a crippled upgrade call "Vista", which contains only
a fraction of the technology they originally hyped.
If I had to guess, I'd say their "Singularity" OS is meant originally
for embedded applications. I get the feeling that Microsoft is trying to
diversify into other markets (Xbox, handheld and embedded) to cover
their bets on a PC market that's saturated.
-- Paul M. Foster ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:40:13 EDT