Why is software OS specific?

[SuperSaiyann]

Why are software operating system specific? Why can't we run chrome.exe on linux? I need detailed answer please quickly

[Sauron]

Because almost all programs rely on kernel functionality, which is different on different operating systems. For example if you need to write to a file you'd be calling a kernel function, but that function works differently on Linux than it does on Windows.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

Dependencies. Most software you use doesn't "talk" directly to hardware, it relies on the operative system, drivers, shared libraries, etc. for various purposes.

[Guest]

Because Different Operating Systems can't come to an agreement on a standard and try to keep you locked into a platform based around there own libraries and system calls.

[SuperSaiyann]

7 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Because almost all programs rely on kernel functionality, which is different on different operating systems. For example if you need to write to a file you'd be calling a kernel function, but that function works differently on Linux than it does on Windows.

 

6 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

Dependencies. Most software you use doesn't "talk" directly to hardware, it relies on the operative system, drivers, shared libraries, etc. for various purposes.

Do you mean system calls? Can you please elaborate it a little?

 

[SuperSaiyann]

1 minute ago, Nayr438 said:

Because Different Operating Systems can't come to an agreement on a standard and try to keep you locked into a platform based around there own libraries and system calls.

Can you please explain it in depth a bit?

[kirashi]

47 minutes ago, SuperSaiyann said:

Do you mean system calls? Can you please elaborate it a little?

Short & simple answer: different operating systems use completely different kernels, drivers, and Operating System level APIs to allow software to interact with the OS, hardware, and memory space in a given system. Binary software can't automagically be cross-platform unless the developer compiles it to be cross-platform when the binary is built because they would have to include instructions for every single OS and hardware architecture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-platform_software#Binary_software

 

Technically speaking, "fat-binaries" are a thing, however, they aren't very commonplace and would take up double or even triple the amount of disk space. As noted in this StackExchange Q&A, it doesn't make sense to build & distribute them except in rare cases where an Operating System is transitioning to new hardware, such as what MacOS has gone through two times in the last 20 years.

https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/274846/why-arent-fat-binaries-more-widely-used-for-cross-platform-applications

 

Long & complex answer: It's complicated, but I'm not a software developer so I don't know how to answer that. (And I never want to be a software developer until the industry pulls its head out of its' ass by open-sourcing ALL hardware and software for the greater good of the entire world rather than for corporate profits that continue making the rich richer and the poor poorer.)

[SuperSaiyann]

20 hours ago, kirashi said:

Short & simple answer: different operating systems use completely different kernels, drivers, and Operating System level APIs to allow software to interact with the OS, hardware, and memory space in a given system. Binary software can't automagically be cross-platform unless the developer compiles it to be cross-platform when the binary is built because they would have to include instructions for every single OS and hardware architecture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-platform_software#Binary_software

 

Technically speaking, "fat-binaries" are a thing, however, they aren't very commonplace and would take up double or even triple the amount of disk space. As noted in this StackExchange Q&A, it doesn't make sense to build & distribute them except in rare cases where an Operating System is transitioning to new hardware, such as what MacOS has gone through two times in the last 20 years.

https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/274846/why-arent-fat-binaries-more-widely-used-for-cross-platform-applications

 

Long & complex answer: It's complicated, but I'm not a software developer so I don't know how to answer that. (And I never want to be a software developer until the industry pulls its head out of its' ass by open-sourcing ALL hardware and software for the greater good of the entire world rather than for corporate profits that continue making the rich richer and the poor poorer.)

Thanks.

[Mark Kaine]

the real answer is money basically. 

 

the different standards and rights holders would never agree on sharing profits, they want it all for themselves basically. 

 

you're basically asking for example Apple to allow Microsoft code on their machines, can you give any good reason how that would benefit Apple - other than "being the good guy"?