Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

First Details of Windows 7 Emerge 615

Posted by CowboyNeal
from the scantilly-clad-screenshots dept.
Some small but significant details of the next major release of Windows have emerged via a presentation at the University of Illinois by Microsoft engineer Eric Traut. His presentation focuses on an internal project called "MinWin," designed to optimize the Windows kernel to a minimum footprint, and for which will be the basis for the Windows 7 kernel.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

First Details of Windows 7 Emerge

Comments Filter:
  • Rinse, Repeat (Score:5, Interesting)

    by orkysoft (93727) <orkysoft@myrealb[ ]com ['ox.' in gap]> on Thursday October 18, 2007 @04:33PM (#21031087) Journal
    So Microsoft tells something about the next version of Windows not long after the people have noticed that their current version isn't all that it's made up to be?
    • Re:Rinse, Repeat (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ozmanjusri (601766) <aussie_bob@NOsPam.hotmail.com> on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:39PM (#21035525) Journal
      Why is this modded troll?

      Microsoft are the kings of targeted vapourware.

      They spent most of the '90s poisoning the well [madisonavenuejournal.com] for their competitors with this tactic. What makes you think they're not doing the same thing again?

    • why troll parent (Score:3, Insightful)

      by unity100 (970058)
      This exactly coincides with the time major pc sellers started providing Xp again. please, use your mod points visely.
    • by jmorris42 (1458) * <jmorris@[ ]u.org ['bea' in gap]> on Thursday October 18, 2007 @11:29PM (#21036005)
      > So Microsoft tells something about the next version of Windows not long after the people
      > have noticed that their current version isn't all that it's made up to be?

      Duh. They have been doing this same bait and switch for the life of the company.

      Step One. Release wonderous New Version! It is THE must have thing.

      Step Two. Everyone realizes it sucks but their money is already in Bill's pocket. And everyone realizes they have no choice but to adopt the new product anyway because of the three year hardware replacement cycle and the illegal (as certified by a US court) bundling agreements with the OEMs that continue to this day. Especially in the case of their OS but to a lesser extent with Office and the other crap they peddle.

      Step Three. Microsoft begins hinting about the upcoming new version. It will fix all of the (not quite admitted) problems with current version AND add exciting new must have features. And it is coming Really Soon.

      Step Four. Have their minions in the trade press obsess about Upcoming new version. All complaints about Current version are answered with "But Upcoming version will be out soon and will fix that problem." After a year or two make sure to begin writing reviews for competitors products by comparing them to features that Upcoming version will be shipping "Any day now". By this point EVERYONE must be lamenting how crappy the shipping version is to help generate the NEED to upgrade when the new version ships.

      Step Five. As the death march to release continues and feaures get cut, spin it as a good thing. (We are focusing on the needs of our customers, blah, blah.) Now that there is beta (anyone else would rate it pre-alpha but.....) code get the drumbeat ramping up in the press with lots of articles and screenshots. Will your hardware be compatible? Can life as you know it continue without the exciting new features? Etc, blah blah.

      Step Six. The product finally releases... See Step One.
      • by 2ms (232331)
        Step Six occuring at bare minimum 3 Years later that originally claimed.
  • by Skiron (735617) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @04:46PM (#21031333) Homepage
    "Windows kernel to a minimum footprint"

    It depends if you have size 24" feet (MS) or 8" feet like real normal OS's. No matter how big the foot, you can only reduce your footprint to the smallest size of the foot.

    So that, as far as I am concerned, is a nebulous comment intended to fool the press and others that still believe every MS 'press release' they spew out.
  • by Prien715 (251944) <agnosticpope.gmail@com> on Thursday October 18, 2007 @09:54PM (#21035113) Journal
    Apparently it goes:

    2, 3, 95, 98, ME, XP, Vista, 7!

    No wonder kids have so much trouble at math....
  • Good intentions (Score:5, Insightful)

    by _merlin (160982) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @09:56PM (#21035127) Homepage Journal
    I'm sure Microsoft developers have good intentions and big dreams for Windows 7. I'm sure they did for Vista at the beginning of the project. But they'll have to cut corners, meet dates, add legacy support, and all the things a behemoth like Microsoft always thinks they have to do. For all their failings, you've gotta give Apple credit for having guts to change things - the Mac has gone through three CPU architectures, and two completely different operating system kernels.
    • Re:Good intentions (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mblase (200735) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:03PM (#21035183)

      But they'll have to cut corners, meet dates, add legacy support, and all the things a behemoth like Microsoft always thinks they have to do.
      Legacy support is important to many business Windows customers; some of them are still using 16-years-old custom software that needs to run on whatever desktop OS their employees are running.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by ottffssent (18387)

        Legacy support is important to many business Windows customers; some of them are still using 16-years-old custom software that needs to run on whatever desktop OS their employees are running.

        Bullshit.

        Slap it in an DOS VM and be done with it. Hell, that's basically what NT does anyway. Backwards compatibility is a great excuse for a crummy security model and a requirement of the marketing department which can't really give a satisfactory answer to "...but why shouldn't I run my DOS VM on Linux and save $20

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by larry bagina (561269)
      They did switch from the DOS-based (1, 2, 3, 95, 98, Me) to NT based kernel. And NT 3 was written for i860 and MIPS, then ported to x86, alpha, and powerpc.
    • Re:Good intentions (Score:4, Insightful)

      by suv4x4 (956391) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:25PM (#21035397)
      For all their failings, you've gotta give Apple credit for having guts to change things - the Mac has gone through three CPU architectures, and two completely different operating system kernels.

      Comparing the situation of Apple and Microsoft is dangerously wrong. Microsoft would most likely bankrupt if they did what Apple did with the three CPU architectures.

      I agree with you MS have good intentions and think big. Where I don't agree is that having a product after 5 years of development is just some "things a behemoth like Microsoft always thinks they have to do".

      What else are they supposed to do? Sit on it?

      They made mistakes with Vista. First mistake was they started developing Vista on post-XP beta code. It created a huge mess, so they dropped it, took the more modular Windows 2003 codebase, further analyzed it, modularized it, and in the span of 2 years, ported their old code over to end with what's Vista.

      They just thought they'd be done too soon. The vision of Vista is great, but they had to carry it out in 2-3 quicker releases, each with lesser more incremental upgrades.

      What Microsoft learned from Vista is they need to get their code in order. The new kernel design is part of this effort. I think they're on a good track, I pray like hell they take their time with it, and finish it properly, versus rush it like Vista.
    • Virtualised Legacy (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Kenshin (43036) <kenshin AT lunarworks DOT ca> on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:38PM (#21035521) Homepage
      Legacy support can easily be virtualised. That's how Apple managed the jump from OS9 to OSX (the "Classic" environment was launched on-demand), and that's how Windows 7 should be built.

      Sure, legacy apps will run marginally slower, but new apps will be free of the built-up cruft.
  • I wonder... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by larry bagina (561269) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:00PM (#21035153) Journal
    I can't help but wonder if this is a reaction to OS X being used on iPhone and iTouch(mySelf). Maybe they're trying to consolidate windows/windows CE. Or maybe this is just another feature that will be cut in favor of demanding a DNA sample before allowing you to access the internet.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:11PM (#21035269)
    This seems to coincide directly with some recent patents filed by Microsoft. It seems what they're truly after is an al-la-carte style OS where DRM is used to control the subscription of such "base OS" additions. Read more on the patent here, http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220060282899%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20060282899&RS=DN/20060282899 [uspto.gov]

    Basically, you purchase the base-system and tack-on additional subscription based modules. My concerns are how the subscription model will function, the subscription pricing, and the potential for removal of prior features such as 3D acceleration on the 'base' system.

    It also appears that DRM will be used extensively in this model and will not be solely limited to music/video as previously thought.

    Honesty, and I'm not trolling here, but this looks pretty scary. This reminds me of driver-signing gone awry. I don't see the potential for open-source/free modules due to item #3. Arbitrary application, memory, CPU, and process limits are also concerning.

    The whole "add-on" 3D support as well as "don't limit my desktop to 5 open applications/processes" seems incredible. I imagine the base system will be usable to about 3% of the population and the subscription-based add-on modules may be pricey. I can't imagine a DRM style approach for 3D gaming/enthusiasts being acceptable. Imagine having to pay $20/mo for 3D + multiple core CPU + 2G RAM and the minute you stop paying all those modules expire and are no longer active until you resume payment; like Napster and other DRM based music models work.

    -evilghost
    • Awesome! (Score:3, Funny)

      by swillden (191260) *

      Honesty, and I'm not trolling here, but this looks pretty scary. This reminds me of driver-signing gone awry. I don't see the potential for open-source/free modules due to item #3. Arbitrary application, memory, CPU, and process limits are also concerning.

      That rocks! Windows 7 will finally provide that last push needed to rocket Linux into the mainstream!

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      people always have such extreme overreactions to any microsoft articles or announcements.

      the component oriented model seems like it could be a smart move - business users may not want fancy 3d or even sound functionality, a barebones os may be perfect for them, especially for terminal services clients.

      this kind of model could also make them immune to their ongoing legal disputes regarding bundled software.

      it could also address user complaints about OS bloat, and fears the next version of windows will come o
  • by edwardpickman (965122) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:13PM (#21035281)
    when its at least in beta.
  • by Wylfing (144940) <brian AT wylfing DOT net> on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:16PM (#21035303) Homepage Journal

    It's going to have a database file system! It's going to be secure! No more rebooting! It will have a really good command line!

  • So what? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by foo fighter (151863) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:17PM (#21035331) Homepage
    The kernel hasn't been Windows's problem since NT 4.

    The real problem is the middle-management clusterfuck. The direct result of which is the bizarro world of Windows the platform and its zillion libraries and APIs that have subtle (and not so subtle, but probably undocumented) incompatibilities.

    Microsoft's own devs can't figure that shit out and they've been trying since XP. It has only become worse since they shoved all the digital restrictions management into the system.
    • Re:So what? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by moosesocks (264553) on Friday October 19, 2007 @05:34AM (#21038495) Homepage
      I should probably go one step further to point out that NT is probably the best (and most modern) general-use kernel in widespread use today. I'm no kernel developer, although after talking to people 'in the know', I get the general concensus that NT was one of the few things Microsoft got right and nailed on the head.

      Although there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the Linux Monolithic Kernel (especially since it's behaving more and more like a microkernel these days), Linus has admitted that were he to start from scratch, it wouldn't be monolithic.

      I don't know too many specifics of the OS X (Mach) kernel, although from what I understand, there are some fundamental performance and latency issues holding the entire system back that have existed in Mach since the beginning.

      Although the software on top of NT is often less than stellar (ruined by the businesses execs, and trashed by the requirement for backward-compatibility), the NT kernel is generally regarded as being the most solid part of the operating system.
      • Re:So what? (Score:4, Informative)

        by ettlz (639203) on Friday October 19, 2007 @07:18AM (#21039045) Journal

        Although there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the Linux Monolithic Kernel (especially since it's behaving more and more like a microkernel these days)
        Exporting the odd service or two (like FUSE) does not a microkernel make. And modern NT is not a microkernel by any stretch. Read what AST has to say. If anything, NT's gigantic Executive makes it even more monolithic than Linux. Anyway, the best solutions often borrow ideas from all over the shop.

        Linus has admitted that were he to start from scratch, it wouldn't be monolithic.
        Citation, please.
  • ah! just in time (Score:5, Insightful)

    by boxlight (928484) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:22PM (#21035373)
    ah! news of a new version of windows -- just in time for the release of Leopard.


    looks like Mistersoftie is up to their old hype the vaporware [wikipedia.org] tricks to dissuade buyers from going with attractive alternatives.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by GaryPatterson (852699)
      Mod parent to +11 'insightful reference to history'

      It's a common tactic from Microsoft. When there's nothing to say and a competitor may get some PR from a tech media looking for something to write about, come out with something about a product that's on the drawing board, or is only marginally closer to release than the drawing board.
    • Re:ah! just in time (Score:4, Interesting)

      by suv4x4 (956391) on Friday October 19, 2007 @03:20AM (#21037817)
      looks like Mistersoftie is up to their old hype the vaporware [wikipedia.org] tricks to dissuade buyers from going with attractive alternatives.

      Because, of course, you can't wait to have MinWin on your machine - the Windows that does only one single thing: publish your tasklist via HTTP.

      Hmmm, so much better than Leopard :P

      Come on, it's just a tech demonstration, Microsoft in fact closed themselves solid after the release of Vista. Management thinks part of the bad reception of Vista is because they were so open about the whole process for the entire 5 years.

      For some part they are right. We'd never know about the dropped features if they were never pre-announced. Most products plan various features that get dropped or deferred in the process of development.

      We'd also be surprised at the Aero Glass UI, and the new security features.

      What we'd be most surprised about though, is the lack of consistency in the UI and stability/performance issues. So I'm not sure Microsoft has the right strategy right now.
  • by Kurt Gray (935) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:23PM (#21035385) Homepage Journal
    You turn on the computer. You are greeted by an angelic chime that gets progressively louder until your speakers shake. You attempt to adjust the volume but it only gets louder still. A full screen Window icon ripples across the screen then all goes black. The product activation screen prompts you to enter your activation keys, printed on 27 pages of holographic alloy glue to the inside of the aluminum DVD case. For the next 3 hours you enter the activation key, taking breaks to use the bathroom, eat, and make phone calls.

    After entering the correct activation keys, a dialog appears prompting you to select your social login profile group. You have no idea what that is so you click "Other Networks" The next dialog says "Connecting to networks..." for the next 5 minutes. A message apears saying "New Hardware Found" but it can't find the driver. Another popup appears "No networks found". Then your desktop appears. The wallpaper is stunning. The Internet Explorer icon appears to majestically float above the screen. You click it. A message appears warning you that the Internet can harm your computer, do you want to continue? You click "Yes". You are prompted to enter your administrator key. This key is on the sticker on the inside of your PC case. You shutdown the PC, get a screwdriver, open the case, write down the 18 digit administrator code, put the case back together and reboot.

    After rebooting, blocking your ears during the chime assault, and oggling the amazing wallpaper, ignoring the "live folders server not found" error, you try Internet Explorer again. You dutifully enter the administrator key. You are asked if you want to save this key to your "universal keyring" You click OK. You are warned that the universal keyring is encrypted and your sending encrypted information. You click OK. After 3 minutes you get an error saying "No key server found" ... and so on...

    You never do get to see the Internet. But the wallpaper is amazing.

     
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by failedlogic (627314)
      This is modded funny, but how about 'Reality'?

      I honestly wonder if some of these posts aren't printed and used internally at Microsoft as either: cubicle decorations, motivation to make better code or ammunition to convince managers to improve the development process.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Jugalator (259273)
      Hmm, I'm now convinced Windows 7 is not its real codename, but it's actually called Project Zombo [zombo.com] over at Redmond.
  • by melted (227442) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:28PM (#21035441) Homepage
    Take it from a former Microserf - this "internal project" will be taken to the nearest corner and shot (and maybe also mutilated and spat on). When you have a huge turd of a codebase dating back 15 years in some places, the last thing you want to do is dramatically rehash it. Projects like this are DOA at Microsoft after the WinFS fiasco.
    • by suv4x4 (956391) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @11:08PM (#21035805)
      Take it from a former Microserf - this "internal project" will be taken to the nearest corner and shot (and maybe also mutilated and spat on). When you have a huge turd of a codebase dating back 15 years in some places, the last thing you want to do is dramatically rehash it. Projects like this are DOA at Microsoft after the WinFS fiasco.

      I guess you didn't understand what they mean by internal. They won't commercialize the kernel itself. They have planned to, are, and WILL use this project to build Window 7 on.

      Unless you've missed that Microsoft has hit some hard limits in the way it managed its codebase and for 2-3 years now is spending heavily on analyzing the source code, separating the code in layers, modules, and removing dependencies between the modules.

      There's no other way forward.
      • by melted (227442) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @11:54PM (#21036245) Homepage
        You don't understand. This is not a way "forward". No one will approve anything that breaks backward compat. The guy who's in charge of Windows now is legendary for building a huge org (Office) one of the primary areas of excellence of which was work avoidance. They spend nine months "planning" to do three months of coding. At Microsoft getting Office to do anything for you is about as easy as getting a bear to ride a bicycle.

        Besides, what are you going to do with the code that's already built on top of the old kernel? Rewrite it? Deprecate it? Do you even begin to comprehend how difficult it is to do at this point if you want solid app compat (which I assure you is a top priority for Microsoft - they don't want to push folks towards Linux by making apps incompatible with the new OS).

        The only way forward now is to start over and do something other than same old NT and support NT as a subsystem a-la POSIX NT subsystem.

        Einstein said "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." This applies to Windows in its current state very well, and they are at the limits of their ability as it is. It's a heck of a lot easier to tangle something than untangle it.
    • by Bryan Ischo (893) on Friday October 19, 2007 @12:05AM (#21036343) Homepage
      But Microsoft has soooooo much money. How can they not be able to do this?

      The thing that always amazes me about Windows is not how half-assed it is, but how half-assed it is given the amount of resources that Microsoft has to throw at the problem. You'd think that they'd have the money to fund tons of cool pieces of software to go with a Windows installation. I mean Windows Paint is a pathetic application that does almost nothing, a team of open source developers could better it in a week. But Microsoft doesn't improve it, or any of the utilities that come with Windows, nor does it ever add any really good or useful ones.

      That's just the start. Why didn't Microsoft implement some really awesome tools to assist with driver and hardware management? What they have is so basic! They have BILLIONS upon BILLIONS of dollars and this is the best that they can do?

      Honestly, Windows XP isn't terrible as an operating system; if you stick to simple stuff and don't expect too much, it can serve you well. But in terms of bang-for-the-buck, it must be the worst piece of software *ever*. Because if it's the best that a company can do with more money than most countries, well that just says that the company in question is pathetic.

      With the amount of money they have, I would think they could afford to fund 10 separate teams in parallel, each developing the next generation of Windows from scratch, and pick the best of the 10 when they're done. And yet they can't even muster enough skill to produce *one* decent next-generation product? What a bunch of losers!
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by skaet (841938)
        Yeah. That was the most mature comment I've read in a while.... "Throw all your money at it, Microsoft, the problem will fix itself!" Right.

        The thing here is not whether they have the resources to make a fantastic product (they have made some decent products when all things considered) but whether they have the management. You contradicted yourself when you said "... Windows Paint is a pathetic application that does almost nothing, a team of open source developers could better it in a week."

        So if OSS
      • by fwarren (579763) on Friday October 19, 2007 @05:06AM (#21038369) Homepage
        If one woman can make a baby in 9 months, surely 9 women can make a baby in one month?

        Even if an organization is flat. And everybody had their shit together and really knew their code.

        2 people have 1 path of communication
        3 people have 3 paths of communication
        4 people have 6 paths of communication
        5 people have 10 paths of communication

        Every person you have that needs to be in the know, adds to the complexity of communicating. Soon there is so much overhead nothing gets done but trying to stay up to date.

        Every "group" at Microsoft has this problem. The vista start button had one programmer working on it. This programmer had a beta tester, meetings with his manager. The manager had meetings with the UI manager, who had to share and work with his staff about how the button looked. The mananger also met with the systems manager, because his team actually had to plug the "shutdown" button into the code that did the shutdown, or hibernate. When it was all said and done. The programmer would make a change, and it would have to go through like 9 or 13 other people before it could be Ok'ed.

        All we are talking about here is ONE LITTLE BUTTON on a menu.

        Parkinson's Law "Work Expands To Fill The Time Available To Complete It"

        Parkinson correctly predicted that the British Navy would have more Admirals one day than they had ships. Due to people being promoted to fill all available space.

        Microsoft is so big. It can't trim back down to being lean and mean. Everything is done to much by committee to get anything important of quality done in a timely matter.

        As someone once said "God so loved the world, that he did not send a committee"

        Microsoft is it's own biggest competitor (Windows 2000 and XP competing against Vista and 7)

        Microsoft is it's own biggest enemy (death by committee)
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by bjourne (1034822)

        The thing that always amazes me about Windows is not how half-assed it is, but how half-assed it is given the amount of resources that Microsoft has to throw at the problem. You'd think that they'd have the money to fund tons of cool pieces of software to go with a Windows installation. I mean Windows Paint is a pathetic application that does almost nothing,

        MS Paint is a horrible example as that is one of the nicest tools Windows has. It is lean and cold starts up in less than a second. It is easy, you don't have to fiddle with layers just to draw a rectangle or some text. Notepad is the same, perfect if you want to paste some random junk och just check out a small text file. There is nothing quite like those tools on Linux, it seems like all utility programs just must have a Python scripting interface, modular toolbars, splash screens... Application startup

      • Agreed! (Score:4, Interesting)

        by 0100010001010011 (652467) on Friday October 19, 2007 @10:07AM (#21040887)
        Apple: 15,810 Microsoft: 61,000 Microsoft has a little under 4 times the number of employees Apple has.

        They both do Hardware: xBox vs Apple Line (I think apple probably has more employees on their hardware than Microsoft.)
        They both do MP3: iPod vs Zune (It should be a wash in employee #'s)
        They both do Office Suite: iWork vs Office (Office has obviously more employees than iWork)
        They both do "Family" apps: iLife vs Microsoft Movie Maker, etc. (iLife probably has more)
        They both do an OS: OS X vs XP/Vista. (With out a doubt XP/Vista has more employees on it than OS X)

        You'd think that they'd be able to do something right. Heck AppleMaybe it's bureaucracy collapsing the whole thing. Maybe what Microsoft needs is a Steve, a dictator, someone that says what goes and no questions from above. Back in the day Apple wasn't run like this and we had Copeland and all other "Next OSes" there were some iffy products (OpenDoc). Then Apple bought NeXT. Steve came back and the rest is history. (And about 3000% in the stock market).

  • This is step one. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by thatskinnyguy (1129515) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:28PM (#21035445)
    Good. Small kernel is a good start. Now make it open source and let me install whatever the hell I want for a desktop manager and applications on top of it.

    I've been saying it for years now. Windows should either be an open standard for operating systems to be built or be a desktop manager built on a Linux kernel. Of course, then what would the diehards bitch about on slashdot?
  • Ouch. Don't do it. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by russellh (547685) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:37PM (#21035501) Homepage
    Until the next great advance in OS technology, the kernel, the core OS is a solved problem by modern standards. Microsoft should build windows around the linux kernel and be done with it. they could refocus their huge resources toward all the great stuff they have cut out in the past. Even the massive wealth of Microsoft can barely compete with their proprietary system against open source developers. Why waste so much time on security issues when the answer is just there for the taking? Of course, they will never do it without a massive shakeup. it's just too threatening. This is their downfall, eventually, at least insofar as platform domination goes. they still have shifting proprietary file formats and forced upgrades, though, at least. what a business.
  • Maybe... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by noz (253073) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @10:48PM (#21035595)
    Maybe then someone at Microsoft will know how their process scheduler works.
  • by DaveAtFraud (460127) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @11:14PM (#21035877) Homepage Journal
    Jumbo shrimp
    Military intelligence
    A new classic
    Efficient bureaucracy
    Peace force
    ...
    MinWin

    Cheers,
    Dave
  • by CleverScreenName (1176231) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @11:22PM (#21035951)
    Every odd Windows Version being good?

    1) Windows 3.1?
    2) Windows 95
    3) Windows 98
    4) Windows Me
    5) Windows XP
    6) Vista
    7) First Contact?
  • by IGnatius T Foobar (4328) on Thursday October 18, 2007 @11:45PM (#21036151) Homepage Journal
    Seriously, this is really the only option for Windows at this point. Anyone who has seen the Windows source code has said that it's an unmaintainable jumble of subsystems that they're having a lot of difficulty continuing to wrap their heads around.

    Microsoft sees what the open source folks are doing -- building quality operating systems around loosely coupled modules with separate developer teams and clearly defined interfaces -- and has decided "oh yeah, Windows should do that too." Of course it's a good idea. Microsoft steals from the best. Ironically, they'll patent it too.
  • Oh God... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by andreyw (798182) on Friday October 19, 2007 @01:29AM (#21037081) Homepage
    Oh God... I can't believe this actually made news. In. Such. A. Horribly. Skewed. Fashion. But this is /. You can watch the presentation HERE - http://www.acm.uiuc.edu/conference/2007/videos [uiuc.edu] It was ONE of MANY presentations given as part of the ANNUAL UIUC ACM-hosted conference. Please actually watch the presentation and STFU. Please. All it shows is that Microsoft is working on fixing what it considers to be mistakes in the design of its NT system. That is it. It's work as part of Win7. It is _not_ Win7. Listen to the questions that students asked Eric about MinWin. Listen to the answers.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by moosesocks (264553)

      Oh God... I can't believe this actually made news. In. Such. A. Horribly. Skewed. Fashion. But this is /.


      William Shatner posts on slashdot?
  • by AbRASiON (589899) * on Friday October 19, 2007 @03:11AM (#21037775) Journal
    HIRE SOME FUCKING UI EXPERTS.

    Sorry to be shouting and all but I'm a Windows guy, I always have been a Windows guy, sure I have that slashdot bone in me, wanting OSS to be huge, great, free and out there for everyone to share and love but let's be realistic now, for some people it's not an option, myself included.

    Honestly I have been really quite satisfied with XP (after becoming accustomed to its own issues)
    However after having recently tried Vista (multiple times) it's a disgrace, PURELY from a look and feel perspective, it's like 500 people designed it around a board room table but consistency and ease of use just aren't even considered.

    I'm definately NOT an apple man by any means, yet having now used OSX for a week and an ipod for a year, they just get (most) stuff right, logical and simple - just how it should be.
    Vista is wrong, it looks wrong, some of you can whinge it sucks under the hood or perhaps DRM ate your babysitter, maybe it has poor performance copying files and playing MP3's (doesn't bother me) but that UI? Good lord if you can't make it better at least give us back the XP one as an option.

    It's time that MS made some RADICAL changes to the user interface, crazy out there stuff, which is actually USEFUL! rather than just re-hashing the same old thing, stapling on some stuff (poorly) and expecting us to enjoy it.

"Right now I feel that I've got my feet on the ground as far as my head is concerned." -- Baseball pitcher Bo Belinsky

Working...