Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Microsoft Singularity Now "Open" Source

Posted by CmdrTaco on Wednesday March 05, @12:00PM
from the it-pulls-me-in dept.
Alex_Ionescu writes "Microsoft's Singularity operating system (covered previously by Slashdot) is now open to the public for download, under a typical Microsoft academic, non-commercial license. Inside is a fully compilable and bootable version of what could be the basis for the future of Windows, or maybe simply an experiment to demonstrate .NET's capabilities. Singularity, if you'll recall, has gained wide interest from researchers and users alike, by claiming to be a fully managed code kernel (with managed code drivers and applications as well), something that would finally revolutionize the operating system research arena. The project is available on CodePlex."

Related Stories

[+] The Microsoft Singularity 615 comments
jose parinas writes ""Microsoft Research has published the first details of a wholly new operating system under development called Singularity, designed new from the ground up, built on a new language and designed with emphasis on dependability instead of performance.""
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Microsoft Singularity Now "Open" Source 25 Comments More | Login | Reply /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Keybindings Beta
Q W E
A S D
Loading ... Please wait.
  • Stability? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by spectrokid (660550) on Wednesday March 05, @12:04PM (#22650444) Homepage
    If this is super-stable-hacker-resistant then there must be some uses where performance is not really an issue: ATM's, Kiosks,... Does anybody know what software exists for this thing? Does it run IE?
  • wharrrt? (Score:5, Funny)

    by russ1337 (938915) on Wednesday March 05, @12:08PM (#22650498)
    In today's news

    "Microsoft releases open source operating system"

    "Mans head explodes from intense confusion after reading news article about Microsoft releasing Open Source OS"
    • Re:wharrrt? (Score:5, Funny)

      by sm62704 (957197) on Wednesday March 05, @12:28PM (#22650810) Homepage Journal
      "Mans head explodes from intense confusion after reading news article about Microsoft releasing Open Source OS"

      Minor nit: you misspelled "Asplodes" [uncyclopedia.org]. From the link:

      Use By Noobs
      N00bs use the term asplode as a form of 13375p33k. For example:
      Non-Noob: Lol I pwnt u with a rocket launcher!
      Noob: Oh teh noes!!! I am asplode!!11!eleventyone!!
      Non-Noob: Wtf?

      A splode: the command prompt
      Micro$oft secretly enabled a splode as a DOS command. Opening the command prompt and entering C:\asplode would start a countdown which would, when finished, cause your hard drive to a splode. Entering D:\asplode made the CD drive a splode. And entering A:\asplode would would make the floppy drive a splode. If you have a B:\ drive, you can a splode it by entering B:\asplode. Usually this makes the 5.25" floppy drive a splode! If you enter this into a Linux shell, it a splodes all computers within a 5-mile radius that run Window$. If you loved your PC, you would have entered this DOS command.

      (Note: drive letter may vary between PCs.)
      It is unknown whether the Singularity OS incorporates this useful command, but it is assumed that a singularity asplosion would release vast quantities of something not real nice.
      • Sometimes tin foil is just a cigar (Score:5, Insightful)

        by fm6 (162816) on Wednesday March 05, @01:34PM (#22651918) Homepage Journal

        It's an attempt to keep developers from even looking at Linux.
        Give me a break. OK, MS is evil, but not everything they do is part of a grand conspiracy. Nobody is going to be stupid enough to stick with Windows just because MS is playing with a research OS that's not even backward compatible with existing software. And nobody at MS is stupid enough to think that anybody will be that stupid.

        This is just another blue sky project from the Microsoft Research, a division that is tasked with coming out with cool stuff without regard to commercial viability. Every big high-tech company has such a division. My own employer, Sun, has Sun Labs, which is always coming out with interesting stuff that mostly has nothing to do with our business model. I think it's mainly a prestige thing, to convince folks that you're a cutting-edge company.
  • Software Isolated Processes (Score:5, Informative)

    by parvenu74 (310712) on Wednesday March 05, @12:12PM (#22650560)

    Singularity, if you'll recall, has gained wide interest from researchers and users alike, by claiming to be a fully managed code kernel (with managed code drivers and applications as well), something that would finally revolutionize the operating system research arena.
    The impression I got by looking at what was known about the project a year ago is that it was of lesser interest that the OS was written in managed code and it was far more interesting that they had solved some problems of inter-process communication in a micro-kernel OS. As you can read at Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]:

    Singularity is a microkernel operating system; however, unlike most historical microkernels, the different components do not run in separate address spaces (processes). Instead, there is only a single address space in which "Software-Isolated Processes" (SIP) reside. Each SIP has its own data and code layout, and is independent from other SIPs. These SIPs behave like normal processes, but do not require the overhead penalty of task-switches. Protection in this system is provided by a set of invariants, such as the memory-invariant which states there will be no cross-references (or memory pointers) between two SIPs. Communication between SIPs occur via higher order communication channels managed by the operating system. These rules are checked during the installation phase of the application, and must be fulfilled in order for Singularity to allow the installation (note: in Singularity, installation is managed by the operating system).
    The promise of Singularity, as I understood it, was the possibility of constructing an O/S kernel with all of the modularity advantages of a microkernel without all of the process communication issues typical to this kernel type.
    • Re:Software Isolated Processes (Score:5, Informative)

      by smallfries (601545) on Wednesday March 05, @12:52PM (#22651230) Homepage
      It sounds like a very interesting project. The idea that screams out from the wiki summary is static analysis and verification. There is a really good rundown in one of the wiki links [microsoft.com]. The really big difference from previous work is not just the use of managed code, but splitting the entire system into either trusted, or verified code. The trusted component is a tiny core, which they are working on verifying. The design of the rest of the kernel and the SIPs is a good one: instead of doing arbitrary verification, change the language design so that you can only write verifiable code. Then see how much of an O/S you can write. The progress is astounding.

      For the IPC they have made some strange choices, receiving is synchronous (as in process calculi) but sending is asynchronous. As they are writing the lowest level parts (such as the schedular) in this code it may be an implementation difficulty with synchronous sends. The cheapness of the IPC seems to be routed in the transfer of ownership that communication implies. In essence you can't alias, you can only pass by value - but the low-level runtime can modify this to pass more efficiently by reference because it can verify there are no dangling references. This would (if it works over a large enough code base) solve the performance issue with IPC in a microkernel. It is (as another reply pointed out) similar to providing the semantics of heavy-weight communication to the programmer in a way that can be implemented with cheap co-routines.

      Having done some (well, little) work in this area I'm really impressed by what they've achieved already.
  • It's open source because... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Gabest (852807) on Wednesday March 05, @12:12PM (#22650562)
    ... they couldn't make it closed. Being written in a managed language means it's easily reversable.
  • I love the name (Score:5, Funny)

    by sm62704 (957197) on Wednesday March 05, @12:15PM (#22650612) Homepage Journal
    However, considering that Vista has become something of a "black hole" for them, I think they were a little late with the "singularity" moniker. Is the next Windows going to be called "Event Horizon?"

    That black hole has surely sucked in a few dollars of mine, and sucked in a lot of little companies that were pulled apart by Microsoft's huge gravity well.

    -mcgrew
    (Apologies for the lack of journals lately)
  • What? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Robber Baron (112304) on Wednesday March 05, @12:17PM (#22650640) Homepage
    Singularity? Did Ballmer finally disappear up his own ass and create one?
  • by Animats (122034) on Wednesday March 05, @12:31PM (#22650872) Homepage

    Very nice. It's sad, though, that Microsoft is making it available as open source, because that means it's not going to become a Microsoft product.

    Singularity is an interesting system. Most of the individual ideas aren't new, but the combination of them is well chosen. It's a message passing microkernel, like VM and QNX, the OSs that actually work reliably. The storage management and of enforcement of process separation at compile time comes from the ALGOL compiler for the Burroughs 5500, circa 1960, for example. They recognized the problem of interaction between interprocess communication and the scheduler and dealt with it; QNX probably has a better solution, but the one in Singularity is OK. Singularity tries a bit too hard to avoid interprocess copying; so did Mach, and it made things worse.

    There's a reasonable design-by-contract language. The language knows about marshalling for interprocess communication, which encourages its use. That's borrowed from Mesa. In most languages, a subroutine call is much easier to code than an interprocess call, which encourages bloat of individual processes.

    Drivers aren't in the kernel and aren't trusted, although drivers that can do DMA still present a security problem. This is a problem with insecure PC hardware; IBM mainframe channels have DMA that goes through MMU checking. That could be fixed, especially since most new peripherals are on USB or FireWire ports. Add-on boards are on the way out.

    Makes me wish I was still doing OS R&D.

  • Microsoft hate (Score:5, Interesting)

    by electrosoccertux (874415) on Wednesday March 05, @12:39PM (#22650982)
    I'm afraid stuff like this is reducing my hate of MS. For several reasons, I am finding MS products less and less frustrating.

    1). Open sourcing weird stuff like this.
    2). Silverlight is pretty good.
    3). I disabled UAC in Vista. Now Vista is just like XP, but it has a prettier (albeit inconsistent at times) UI.
    4). Realizing that as much as I may like free as in freedom with Linux, in XP, my stuff just works, and it's fast and snappy and doesn't get bogged down (of course I'm not doing stupid stuff like using IE visiting sketchy websites that install things). It works great for all my games, etc. Solid OS; I just had to get over my Linux vigilatism to notice it.
    5). I just found the speach recognition built into Vista 2 nights ago. For just about everything but typing, it works flawlessly. As much as I love my mouse; sitting back, relaxing with both hands comfortably unbound from a keyboard and mouse, feels absolutely wonderful. So instead of clicking minimize/maximize/close, alt+tab'ing until you see the window you want, clicking start, etc; you just say into your headset "Minimize" "Maximize" or the name of the window you want to use. So to change focus back to Firefox, I would say "Mozilla Firefox". Then you can say things like "Bookmarks" and it opens the menu for your bookmaks. Say the name of the bookmark and it selects it, then "ok" or "enter" to open it. If you've got several bookmarks it thinks you're saying, it highlights all of them with a transparent bar that you can see through, and places a number in the middle of that bar. So if I say "Slashdot", it highlights the 8 slashdot bookmarks I have, and then I say "7" and it opens the one under the bar labelled "7". "Scroll Down", "Scroll down 10", "Press control w" to close a tab. If you have a list of sites you usually like to go to, and have them all bookmarked (for me they're all in the bookmarks toolbar folder), then browsing your favorite sites that you check daily is easy. "GM [gmail]" "Reddit" etc. Since I have all these bookmarks on the toolbar, it automatically finds them and clicks them. When you're surfing the net, just say the name of the link on the page and it opens it for you.

    The Start Menu works nicely too. Just say "Start" and then the name of the program you want to open. Then it opens it. If it thinks there's several things you could be referring to, it shows these in the search results pane and uses the same number scheme to select which one you want. You can access windows here as well; after saying "Start" say "Show numbers" and then the number of the window you want to restore.

    This is the same tech they're putting in Ford/Lincoln/Mercuries for the GPS and music system that you've been seeing commercials for lately. After using the Vista version for just about 30 minutes, I've quickly gotten used to it; the commands are very intuitive. Gotta say it's really cool stuff. Yes I know OSX has had this since who knows when, but meh, OSX can't play my games. It feels much closer to what I'm thinking I want to do, because there's no physical motion besides just speaking what I want to do and it does it. Seems like they're progressing towards the synergy between brain and computer control very nicely.
  • Please fix the title! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Omnifarious (11933) on Wednesday March 05, @12:53PM (#22651238) Homepage Journal

    Won't someone fix the title? It's just plain wrong. A non-commercial license is not Open Source.

  • Doesn't quality (Score:5, Insightful)

    by HermMunster (972336) on Wednesday March 05, @02:08PM (#22652448)
    That doesn't even remotely resemble open source. It is NOT open source.

    This is Microsoft's attempt to redefine what Open Source means. It is an aberration of their "embrace, extend, extinguish". They are trying to confuse the market into a non-understanding of what open source means.

    That license is not even close to the GPL. People who develop for open source need to understand and spread the word that this is simply a matter of intentional obfuscation of the ideals behind open source and what it attempts to achieve. Giving up is giving in, so don't give up on spreading word.
    • Re:!free (Score:5, Insightful)

      by moosesocks (264553) on Wednesday March 05, @12:11PM (#22650544) Homepage
      Can't you look past your own ideology to see that this is actually a remarkably good thing, even if it possibly could be better.
        • Re:!free (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Azarael (896715) on Wednesday March 05, @12:24PM (#22650750) Homepage
          That's also fine, until Microsoft decides to go after you once you've reviewed the source, but happen to work on a parallel product, say Linux. This may be a cynical analysis, but the fact remains that this could be a trap, and slashdot previously covered similar problems with the source code releases of XP to Gov't, etc staff.
          • Exactly, it's a trap (Score:5, Interesting)

            by Bozdune (68800) on Wednesday March 05, @12:58PM (#22651326)
            the fact remains that this could be a trap

            If you are a large entity, revealing your source via restricted license has become one of the best ways to cause your ideas to be protected, since you can argue that anyone else who had access to your source code, and then subsequently wrote something competitive, has "stolen your intellectual property." Even if you don't win the case, or the case is weak to begin with (as was SCO's), at the very least you can make a lot of trouble for a competitor, mire them in an expensive multi-year court case, and cause Casper Milquetoast prospects to avoid a "possibly infringing" solution.

            This could very well be Microsoft duplicity at its finest. It is built-in protection for Windows 7. Let's assume that software patents are overthrown by the SCOTUS, Microsoft's SCO friends die the zombie death they so richly deserve, and that Microsoft is forced, kicking and screaming, to obey standards by the EU and others -- in other words, all of Microsoft's existing weapons to maintain its monopoly position are defused. This strategy becomes a key defensive position.

            Do not look at this code. You must be able to answer, "I never saw it," under oath, if you ever expect to build something competitive.
          • Re:!free (Score:5, Interesting)

            by IamTheRealMike (537420) on Wednesday March 05, @01:27PM (#22651792) Homepage

            Singularity and Linux are so completely different that the chances of successfully prosecuting somebody for "stealing code" or even ideas is zero. Not only is Singularity written in a custom derivative of C# rather than C, but it has very different concepts of what a process is, what a kernel is, how system components communicate, and so on.

            I, for one, am very happy to hear this and will definitely be checking it out. Singularity is probably the most interesting research OS out there right now, in multiple dimensions. The main challenge they have to tackle next is one that most microkernels never really reached (because their performance was too poor to make it worth bothering with) - once a component does fail, how can you rewind the system to a safe recovery point? I emailed the Singularity guys about this and got back a very nice reply, which basically said "we don't know, that's still a research problem we need to investigate".

            Anyway. Good on MS Research. Let's see if anything interesting comes of this. It doesn't have to be useful, mind you, just interesting.

        • Re:!free (Score:5, Informative)

          by alan_dershowitz (586542) on Wednesday March 05, @12:51PM (#22651208)

          Why should anyone spend any time learning and working with this tool if their efforts cannot be used commercially?
          Two reasons: Because it is, allegedly, a highly modern kernel design that (I've read) implements a next-generation security model that is conceptually too different to be bolted on conventional modular monolithic kernels. With an academic, noncommercial license you can use it to to learn about kernels. If you're not interested in or learning about kernels, only potentially using them, then yeah, I concede your point. However, secondly, an academic noncommercial license to the source doesn't preclude Microsoft selling an OS based on that kernel commercially, in which case having the source does have practical value for programmers even if it cannot be modified.
      • Re:NOT Open Source (Score:5, Insightful)

        by A.K.A_Magnet (860822) on Wednesday March 05, @12:31PM (#22650858) Homepage

        Fuck off. I'm really tired of you OSS fascists. You don't have a clue, you can't actually comment on the news because Singularity is so over your head, yet you're the loudest idiots on slashdot. OMG OPENSORS FTW!!! Idiots.
        Actually working in CS research in a related field, I do have a pretty good idea of what Singularity is, how it works and how nice it is. It doesn't make it Free/Open Source by any mean and so the headline is misleading.
        I know very well that Microsoft Research and Microsoft are very loosely-coupled, however the article was submitted by a Microsoft proponent (judging by his account history) which "has signed an NDA with Microsoft" and one can very well see how this benefits to Microsoft (they're working hard to make everyone think they do "Open Source" too with their SharedSource initiatives and such -- btw they do have a few projects under true F/OSS licenses afaik).

        Microsoft (as well as other proprietary software companies) is (and has been) very interested in spreading FUD regarding Open Source (such as "if the source is available then it must be Open Source", obviously using a flaw opened by the Open Source Initiative which put the emphasis on the openness of the code rather than on its freedom from the start), and with such an headline on a site such as Slashdot (ie, where a lot people go but don't browse further than the main page) I'm sure to take a coffee next week with someone who will tell me about Singularity now being Open Source... Is that your definition of "news"?

        Singularity is a great research project but it's not Free/Open Source by any means. So grand-parent is right (as are others), and you are just as much as a fascist than the F/OSS zealots you criticize since your critics are based on them being OSS fascist and not on the facts being right or wrong. Let's call a cat a cat. Open Source is a well-defined term (just like "Windows-compatible" and nobody would like to see the Wine project tout itself of that feat unless it's 100% true), so let's respect it.