I reckon the NT kernel is as least as stable as the BSD kernel, perhaps even more so. The team behind the NT kernel architecture is top notch. It’s what’s layered on top of the kernel and what’s plugged into the wide of it by hardware manufacturer drivers that tends to make the OS kind of shit.
This “we make an OS, you guys write the motherboard drivers, you pay a third party to put a signature on it” approach was a choice. Apple has had plenty of third party manufacturers over the years and they forced them to write better drivers and firmware. Ignoring the quality is a choice.
Free operating systems have control over the drivers so they filter out shit code by becoming responsible for maintaining it. That’s why so much Qualcom code isn’t in the Linux kernel, it’s not good enough or it’s not done right.
Microsoft took the easy way out by handing over QC to everyone else. They have programs to validate drivers (WHQL) but then manufacturers will tell you to download the “latest” driver from their website that does all kinds of stupid shit that would never pass WHQL testing, because it’ll give you 5 fps extra.
Apple has made plenty of stupid decisions in their OS (every “I want to switch to macOS” thread is full of $5 tools to add usability features that everyone else has had built in since Windows Vista). I’ve never heard of Apple charging for updates though, they were the ones to start doing the free OS version updates that Windows 10 copied.
MS realized that the way into the future is making the OS a subscription, like Apple did. Yes Apple were first, MS copied. You see something that’s good, you adjust to implement it on your terf.
Regarding the charging for updates part, I don’t actually own a Mac, so it’s just what I’ve read over the years online. I’m sorry if I made a mistake on that part.
You do have a point though about MS passing the ball to the manufacturers regarding the drivers. Still, even with just the native drivers, Windows supports a lot more hardware than MacOS does.
Regarding the NT kernel vs the *BSD one, I just don’t agree. Sure, the team behind it might be top notch, but in my experience the *BSD kernel is more stable. Sure, lack of drivers, smaller user base, but if you manage to get everything running, any of the BSD flavors is rock solid. Sorry, but can’t say the same about the NT kernel.
I reckon the NT kernel is as least as stable as the BSD kernel, perhaps even more so. The team behind the NT kernel architecture is top notch. It’s what’s layered on top of the kernel and what’s plugged into the wide of it by hardware manufacturer drivers that tends to make the OS kind of shit.
This “we make an OS, you guys write the motherboard drivers, you pay a third party to put a signature on it” approach was a choice. Apple has had plenty of third party manufacturers over the years and they forced them to write better drivers and firmware. Ignoring the quality is a choice.
Free operating systems have control over the drivers so they filter out shit code by becoming responsible for maintaining it. That’s why so much Qualcom code isn’t in the Linux kernel, it’s not good enough or it’s not done right.
Microsoft took the easy way out by handing over QC to everyone else. They have programs to validate drivers (WHQL) but then manufacturers will tell you to download the “latest” driver from their website that does all kinds of stupid shit that would never pass WHQL testing, because it’ll give you 5 fps extra.
Apple has made plenty of stupid decisions in their OS (every “I want to switch to macOS” thread is full of $5 tools to add usability features that everyone else has had built in since Windows Vista). I’ve never heard of Apple charging for updates though, they were the ones to start doing the free OS version updates that Windows 10 copied.
MS realized that the way into the future is making the OS a subscription, like Apple did. Yes Apple were first, MS copied. You see something that’s good, you adjust to implement it on your terf.
Regarding the charging for updates part, I don’t actually own a Mac, so it’s just what I’ve read over the years online. I’m sorry if I made a mistake on that part.
You do have a point though about MS passing the ball to the manufacturers regarding the drivers. Still, even with just the native drivers, Windows supports a lot more hardware than MacOS does.
Regarding the NT kernel vs the *BSD one, I just don’t agree. Sure, the team behind it might be top notch, but in my experience the *BSD kernel is more stable. Sure, lack of drivers, smaller user base, but if you manage to get everything running, any of the BSD flavors is rock solid. Sorry, but can’t say the same about the NT kernel.