Microsoft announced a new operating system for IoT called Azure Sphere OS. But here’s the shocker: It’s based on Linux, not on Windows.
I’ll pause a moment while you let that one sink in.
Sign up for our new free newsletter to get three time-saving tips each Friday — and get free copies of Paul Thurrott's Windows 11 and Windows 10 Field Guides (normally $9.99) as a special welcome gift!
"*" indicates required fields
Ready? OK. Here’s the story.
During a live security briefing webcast today, Microsoft announced an end-to-end Internet of Things (IoT) solution that pairs its Azure-based cloud services with IoT devices.
“Of course we are the Windows company,” Microsoft’s Brad Smith said during the webcast while holding up a tiny IoT-optimized micro-controller unit (MCU) chip. “But what we’ve recognized is, the best solution for a computer of this size—in a toy—is not a full-blown version of Windows. It is what we are creating here.”
And what Microsoft is creating here is Azure Sphere OS, a new operating system aimed at tiny MCU-based IoT devices that is based on Linux.
“It is a custom Linux kernel complemented by the kinds of advances that we have created in Windows itself,” Smith continued. “For anyone who has been following Microsoft, I’m sure you’ll recognize that, after 43 years, this is the first day that we’re announcing that we’ll be distributing a custom Linux kernel. It’s an important step for us. It’s an important step, I think, for the industry. And it will enable us to stand behind the technology in a way I believe the world needs.”
To that last bit, Smith is referring to the 10-year support lifecycle for Azure Sphere OS, which of course matches the support lifecycle for Microsoft’s enterprise offerings.
Since this was a security webcast, you might be wondering what role security plays in all this. As it turns out, security is the third piece, after the Azure cloud and the Azure Sphere OS, in this puzzle. And Microsoft has created a new Azure Sphere Security Service that it says will guard every Azure Sphere device, securely broker device-to-device and device-to-cloud communications, detect emerging threats, and renew itself as needed.
I’m going to review this webcast with an eye towards better understanding this new offering. But it’s impossible to hear this news without thinking about the recent changes to Windows and my editorializing about Microsoft’s cloud- and IoT-based role in this next wave.
More soon.
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#263258"><em>In reply to hrlngrv:</em></a></blockquote><p>Of course it depends on the required size. Just two years ago I worked on an embedded project that used an MCU with 4K of RAM and 64K of Flash (Flash is used for the program). I don't think any amount of money would make it possible to get Windows Core to fit on it.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#263320"><em>In reply to hrlngrv:</em></a></blockquote><p>"I doubt any Linux kernel could fit in 64KB of storage and use just 4KB RAM."</p><p><br></p><p>I agree. Of course I've worked on products with much fewer resources, the least of which had a 4-bit processor with 512 bytes of 8 bit ROM and 32 nibbles (4-bit) of RAM.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#263330"><em>In reply to hrlngrv:</em></a></blockquote><p>Well, a hello world program that runs on a modern OS has to be compatible with the larger "agenda" of an OS. Funny too, because historically most embedded systems couldn't run a hello world program because they didn't have any way to display text. </p><p><br></p><p>But like black and white photography before color and command line interfaces, NASA didn't use highly optimized 8-bit code as a design choice, but out of necessity. It doesn't make sense to not take advantage of cheaper resources and more productive computer languages to satisfy some obsolete engineering criteria.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#263274"><em>In reply to F4IL:</em></a></blockquote><p>If you look at the description of Windows Core, it seems rather large (although potentially a lot smaller than full Windows) and includes stuff that probably is not that useful in a small embedded system. On the other hand, some of these customized Linux kernels are pretty small (sometimes I wonder what the minimum set of characteristics needed to classify a kernel as "Linux" really are).</p>
shameermulji
<blockquote><a href="#263229"><em>In reply to slbailey1:</em></a></blockquote><p>I’m not sure that , that move & this story are related. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#263257"><em>In reply to hrlngrv:</em></a></blockquote><p>Even Linux isn't the optimal choice for embedded systems but it had the advantage of being royalty-free, unlike its more embedded-centric competitors. Embedded code is rarely portable (particularly in the past) so there was no installed base of programs that discouraged people from using embedded Linux the way there was for Desktop Linux that wasn't compatible with the installed base of Windows programs.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#263319"><em>In reply to hrlngrv:</em></a></blockquote><p>"If there's no need for persistent volatile storage, and there's really one process with a few (or several) threads, how much need is there for an OS per se?"</p><p><br></p><p>Yes, there probably isn't.</p><p><br></p><p>As far as wine is concerned, compatibility may be a nuanced matter for developers or enthusiasts, but for the average user it either works or it doesn't and for them, it doesn't. But my point was just that compatibility was not much of an issue for embedded Linux systems.</p>
skane2600
<p>While Linux (or any OS) might be a bit bloated for many IoT devices, "One Windows" never made much sense to me as it applies to IoT.</p><p><br></p><p>If you think about it this announcement isn't as dramatic as it sounds. Microsoft's historical concern with Linux was that it might be a major competitor to Windows on the desktop. That didn't really happen and it's unlikely to ever happen. Microsoft was never a major player in embedded systems and using the Linux kernel is unlikely to have any negative impact on Windows.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#263316"><em>In reply to hrlngrv:</em></a></blockquote><p>It would be even better if the architecture made it impossible to run code from anywhere but the read-only media. A lot of damage can be done before the power is turned off especially for devices that may run continuously for days.</p>
Stooks
<blockquote><a href="#263322"><em>In reply to mikefarinha:</em></a></blockquote><p>"It will let Windows be Windows and let other devices come to market."</p><p><br></p><p>I think it is too late. Also I think they way Microsoft sees it…."Let Windows be Windows until its stops making money in 5-10 years and lets push everything to the cloud/subscriptions". </p><p><br></p><p>New products at Microsoft will completely focused on cloud/subs. I don't say that as a negative because it is what will make money for them and that is the purpose of the business.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#263324"><em>In reply to atulmarathe:</em></a></blockquote><p>I don't think it's clear if there's more Linux developers than Windows developers, but most rank-and-file developers targeting either platform don't necessarily have the skills for embedded work. </p>
RR
<p>This makes a ton of sense on so many levels. </p><p>From a business perspective, Microsoft needs to respond to the successful attacks on their former OS dominance with low cost, fit for purpose solutions instead of expensive, properitary, originally-built-for-something-else thing like Windows. So this is nothing more than the Google mobile playbook applied to IoT. Microsoft saw how the movie played out last time, and looks like they are finally responding fundamentally. </p><p>Of course each new thing has its own set of key factors, and I like that they seem to be building a complete business case, as they see it, here around security. You notice that the more successful players in the last 10 years or so, Amazon (commerce), Google (freemium, internet), Apple (premium, simplicity), all have a few, wide appealing things they are built around</p><p>I have for a long time (many other as well) argued that it was Windows that blinded them to many opportunities they ended up missing, so, about time they cut off that sinning hand …</p>
Stooks
<blockquote><a href="#263420"><em>In reply to James_Wilson:</em></a></blockquote><p>??????? Why would EMC say anything?????? </p><p><br></p><p>VMware has always had its roots in Linux. For years the base of ESX/I was RedHat. Now it is a customized version of Linux. Same with most things in a Data Center.</p>
Stooks
<p>Socking! Not.</p><p><br></p><p>The whole world runs on some form of "NIX" (Unix/Linux). Your cable/DSL modem, home router, smart home switches, PlayStation, TV OS, Apple TV, Roku, Smart Locks, Cameras, thermostats, Anything Amazon, Anything Google, Anything Apple, Anything Samsung, the entire network path to this site, the server this website runs on….. some form of "NIX". </p><p><br></p><p>If you have a Windows PC or Xbox then that is Windows the rest…not so much.</p>