# Windows 8 runs on the dreaded "Hybrid" kernel? *sigh*



## REFONYA (Sep 7, 2012)

WARNING: *Rant coming below.*

Apparently, Windows 8 is said to run on a Hybrid kernel, which is a bridging topology of low-level access to hardware with abstraction for higher user-mode software that executes based on that kernel.

Linus Torvalds, the guy who started the Linux kernel approach, says that a Hybrid kernel is the same thing as a Monolothic kernel, and a microkernel takes the same approach.

Why is Microsoft still doing old things and not stepping up and researching new kernel modules and options?

I've speculated countless times that Microsoft can research the exokernel and new GUI alternatives to power-up and give their operating systems a new touch, new process, and new types of features to users.

I mean they charge so much money for their operating systems ... at least make them very, very good if I'm paying over $100.00 for your software instructions.

What Windows needs is Microsoft to actually step-up and give it a makeover. Their OS is not robust enough, not fast enough, not optimizable enough, not up to par with this generation of computing technologies, and not graphically beautiful enough.


----------



## Elvandil (Aug 1, 2003)

The word "hybrid" has no specific technical meaning, so any statements made about a hybrid kernel are meaningless without knowing specifically what the term means in a particular context.


----------



## Compiler (Oct 11, 2006)

A lot of words that Microsoft spits out is meaningless. Just try reading Microsoft's server page for small biz.... its a lot of stupid buzz words which doesn't really tell you what the hell it does.

Then go over to Apple, who has a sever version of their OS and they SHOW you what their server can do. Then I go back to MS which has 5x the text that tells me nothing... An example: 
*Microsoft: *The flux capacitor handles 10m-megawatts of power which powers then Hypo-drive which allows the amazing execution of the lighting system which is enhanced from last years version. It will improve your workload and enhance productivity with inter-connectivity with the past and future without exploding your brains due to the ion particles bouncing in the unobtainum core 2.3 advance server and support package. 
* Apple: * It's a time machine.


----------



## DoubleHelix (Dec 10, 2004)

The post isn't a real person asking real questions. Congrats on falling into the trap.

No need to bash Windows. Just use something else.


----------



## Compiler (Oct 11, 2006)

Okay, I made the adjustment to my post. You are right... My point was not bashing Windows, sorry. I was bashing MS' promotional materials. Oh, their new logo is kinda... "okay" - some people hate it for some reason. I think its fine 

BTW, I must admit... microsoft has re-worked their server page, its improved, but a mess.
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/server-cloud/windows-server/overview.aspx

Now compare that to Apple:
http://www.apple.com/osx/server/features/


----------



## DoubleHelix (Dec 10, 2004)

Let me know how your SQL Server install goes on the Apple server.


----------



## Compiler (Oct 11, 2006)

There is SQL... and as I said, for small business. Those who need simple features. For anything really serious, go Linux.
My post was not about the MS-Server itself, it was MS's way of selling it with meaningless words.


----------



## DoubleHelix (Dec 10, 2004)

No, there's no Microsoft SQL Server for Mac.

You don't have much professional experience if you think all the "serious" work is only done on Linux servers.


----------

