I am going to armchair quarterback the future of Windows. I have absolutely no insight into what Microsoft are doing, and no deeper knowledge into the internals of Windows than having read the odd Windows Internals book ages ago, as well as following some Microsoft adventures, such as the super deprived windows images they tried to introduce as docker base images for people to use.

What is wrong with Windows you say? Apart from the new ream of bugs, the ads, the telemetry, the copilot integration, the constant UI changes that still don’t solve the fundamental problems?

Well – I think the kernel architecture of Windows is sound. It’s designed by the guy behind VMS, it is very flexible. Things like WSL1 was possible due to the pluggable architecture, I think it may have a performance drawback compared to less heavily abstracted systems, but OTOH, it does have its benefits in the situation we are.

I think NTFS is sound in terms of what it does, it supports journaling, it has granular security, it’s arguably better than EXT4 in certain ways – except it really struggles with small files and big directories. The main problem with NTFS is that rumours say it is so legacy now within the company that developers always try to create new filesystems rather than work on NTFS. I think where modern AI tools actually shine is the way it allows you to wrestle legacy code under control, refactor and make the code maintainable for new developers. If the future of computing in general – and not just in Linux – is inevitably moving towards big folders with small files, a change has to be made, or Microsoft could choose to natively support EXT4 or ZFS.

The big problem Windows needs to solve is the terrible Windows API, as in the GDI bitmap nonsense and the Windows message stacks.

They have tried so many times to make XAML a thing, and I guess I haven’t given up about that, I mean it is fairly close to MacOS X+/NeXT’s interfacebuilder, which clearly works despite being awful to use. Just make compile into something closer to the metal instead of having it managed. Also, don’t drag OLE2 out of the mausoleum for this like you did with Windows 8, just have an app model that starts a process with main() and then hooks into the UI stack. Sure, sandbox the apps as the operating system now has a bunch of built-in security concepts that didn’t exist in DOS that is the foundation for the current Windows API stack, but use some sane method that is compatible with how processes should work in a operating system not from 1980.

Basically we need to leave device contexts handles behind and get onto canvases. I don’t know what a good UI stack should look like, but fundamentally – security – i.e. multi user access and remote control- as a first class design concern, vector graphics, hardware acceleration and effective use of modern processors need to be high on the list of demands. Surely, starting from scratch would allow you to better handle things like clipboards securely.

So – breaking compatibility I say? Yes – and no. I think Microsoft should create a new subsystem for running apps on a completely separate UI stack, with security and performance as the key metrics during design. If you insist on compatibility, let the XAML used for the new stack to be mostly compatible with whatever XAML dialect that has the biggest number of running apps, and find a way to run old apps in a GDI32 emulator in the new desktop. Performance penalty? Yes, allow it. The new UI paradigm is the future, but if people choose to install the legacy subsystem, their old apps will still run. Security features and a well defined upgrade path through microsoft’s developer tooling should allow Enterprise IT departments to force the software estates towards only relying on the new stack.

They should use their enormous network of influencers – MVPs and RDs – to bully people into upgrading their apps to native 64 bit new UI stack like Apple have done multiple times (MacOs legacy => MacOS X+, Motorola 68000 to PowerPC, PowerPC to Intel, Intel to Apple Silicon).

It will end the previously endless cycle of Microsoft attempting to shoehorn a new UI into old windows, and will firmly hang a Sword of Damocles over all legacy windows apps allowing a clear sustainable path to the future.

If the technical design is clean enough, it will be possible to convert desktop virtualisation giants to the new stack early on to get a strong market share, letting you only be dependent on individual app developers to keep up, and given the Office Suite is such a key player, binning the legacy UI and moving to the new stack for themselves among to will directly benefit adoption.