[soraminazuki]

NT is a monolithic kernel and "hybrid kernel" is a pure marketing term. You can move functionality out of the kernel into userspace or not. There is no in-between.

I also don't get why people claim NT is "better." Linux is a modern kernel under very active development.

[kakwa_]

The graphic stack in NT is done in a microkernel fashion, it runs in kernel space but doesn't (generally) crash the whole OS in case of bugs.

There are a few interviews of Dave Cutler (NT's architect) around where he explains this far better than I am here.

Overall, you have classic needs and if you don't care about OSS (either for auditability, for customizability or for philosophical choice about open source), it's a workable option with its strength and weaknesses, just like the Linux kernel.

[soraminazuki]

Parts of the kernel can be made more resilient against failures, but that won't make it a microkernel. It'll still run in a shared address space without hardware isolation. It's just not possible to get the benefits of microkernels without actually making it one.

Also Linux being OSS can't be dismissed because it means it'll have features that Microsoft isn't interested in for Windows.

[p_ing]

> I also don't get why people claim NT is "better."

Because it does do some things "better". All I/O is async. No stupid OOM. Personality support. Stable ABI.

> Linux is a modern kernel under very active development.

As is NT, on both accounts.

[soraminazuki]

Modern Linux supports asynchronous I/O. It's debatable whether NT's lack of memory overcommitting is a superior choice. OS personalities have never been relevant outside of marketing and might even be technical debt at this point, as virtualization offers a more effective solution with significantly less complexity. Moreover, the Linux kernel maintains a stable ABI.

Much of the discussion surrounding NT's supposed superiority is outdated or superficial at best. Linux, on the other hand, offers several advantages that actually matters. It supports a wider variety of filesystems natively, with FUSE providing exceptional utility. Linux also accommodates more architectures and allows for more creative applications through features like User Mode Linux and the Linux Kernel Library. It also has a more robust debugging ecosystem thanks to its large community and open source nature. All of these things are possible because Linux isn't bound by a single company's commercial interests.

Also, is Microsoft putting as much effort into NT these days? I find it hard to believe they care about NT when they stopped caring about what runs on top of it, leading to articles like this one.