Microsoft Upgrades Vista Kernel in SP1 231
KrispySausage writes "One of the big features discussed in early speculation of Windows Vista SP1 was the kernel upgrade, which was supposed to bring the operating system into line with the Longhorn kernel used in Windows Server 2008. With Vista SP1 going RTM, there hasn't been so much as a peep from Microsoft about the mooted kernel update. Has it happened? Well the answer is yes it has. Presumably the main reason for Microsoft's silence on the subject is that as they're keen to promote the improvements and enhancements to Vista, rather than placing emphasis on a kernel upgrade, which some people might see as a risk of newly-introduced instability."
I was kind of hoping to see a performance review.. (Score:5, Interesting)
I am one of the many who switched back to XP..performance on my tablet stunk with Vista. However, I did like some of the ease-of-use mobility features, but it wasn't worth the grief of performance and drivers.
I would like to run Vista....I just need a compelling reason to do so.
Re:confused (Score:5, Interesting)
And, of course, as you noted, XP is losing support next year--just as it's running better than ever!
FAIL (Score:2, Interesting)
Vista is a failure. Even though people complained non stop when XP came out, the adoption rate was MASSIVE when compared to Vista.
Microsoft: From the moment the very first Longhorn alpha were leaked to P2P networks, and people got a taste of the new MS vision, Vista was doomed to fail. Even though there was a complete rewrite, it was all downhill from this point.
I suggest you put this one down to experiance Microsoft and realize that your user base is becoming more and more knowledgeable and discerning. Your old tactics will not work for much longer.
Let see if you can come up with something REALLY good with the new MinWin (Windows 7). From what I've heard about the kernel development, it takes a lot from the modular approach used in many Unices, and if MS can build a (fairly) open, and moreover loosly coupled modular system, then I think they'll be onto a winner.
Re:I was kind of hoping to see a performance revie (Score:5, Interesting)
I occasionally game on my unit, so now I'm running an XP/Vista dual-boot, but msot of my work time is in Vista these days. For my unit, it doesn't seem to be appreciably slower than XP was, (but to be fair, I'm not running Aero Glass since the integrated graphics don't support it) and some of the features work noticeably better.
For me specifically:
- Handwriting Recognition is improved. (In both English, and Japanese.)
- Searching was greatly improved.
- Hibernation to file now restores properly every time.
System specs:
Toshiba R15-s822
1.6GHz Pentium M
160GB HD
2GB RAM
Vista Ultimate.
Would you tell me a bit more about your Vista experience? Specifically, was it the over-all experience that sent you running back to XP, or was it the tablet specific features?
Re:I dont get it (Score:4, Interesting)
If Vista SP1 is based on 2008 Server (Score:3, Interesting)
What I had originally heard was that Windows 2008 Server and Vista SP1 were going to be based on XP code for compatibility issues in order to make the OS more stable and more compatible. I am not sure how much XP code was used on the new kernel.
Since I support many friends and family members who have Vista machines, I am thinking of buying a new PC with Vista preinstalled on it, and hopefully SP1 to see if it fixes the problems that the original Vista had. As I recall the original XP also had instability issues and compatibility issues and XP SP1 fixed those, and then XP SP2 made even more improvements and made XP more stable and more compatible.
What I hope is that Vista SP1 ends up being what the original Vista had promised. The only thing is the hardware requirements for Vista are 3 times or more the requirements that XP had. So of course upgrading an XP machine to Vista is going to run it slower. Vista on a newer machine made in 2007/2008 should run a lot better than Vista on a 2004/2005/2006 machine.
If all else fails, I hope that ReactOS [reactos.org] is developed into a stable build in 2008/2009 some time. People need to keep an eye on that open sourced OS. Once it goes into beta testing, it is in alpha right now, but 0.4 or 0.5 will enter Beta testing and be good enough to use as an alternative to Windows.
Keep in mind that Windows 2008 Server is based on Windows 2003 Server, which was based on Windows XP. Windows Vista was not based on Windows XP, but was a rewrite attempt. Vista and Longhorn are actually too different projects, Vista was a rewrite of Windows, while Longhorn was based on Windows XP. At least that is what I heard.
Re:What?! (Score:3, Interesting)
1. suspend / resume
2. memory consumption
3. Finally fixes the horrendous performance when copying files
4. Network performance is excellent even when listening to music.
Overall on a laptop that is not my primary computer I am pleased with the huge difference sp1 actually does make. I am sure within a few more weeks my mind will change, but there is not question about the increase in performance.
Re:confused (Score:4, Interesting)
No. I can't.
I'm talking about as an HTPC, and there's hardware in my system that simply doesn't work with Linux. There are absolutely no drivers for NEC-based TV tuner cards, such as my AverMedia M780. It's a gorgeous card... generates *much* less heat than a similar Hauppauge card does *especially when viewing 1080i HDTV*, better picture, and better ATSC reception than anything else I've tried. Absolutely the best TV tuner card I've found. But it's simply not supported by Linux. And switching to Hauppauge or something else isn't an option, because this is a passively cooled silent PC, and having a tuner card with a block temperature 30'C hotter than the M780 is out of the question.
There *are* Linux-based HTPC options. MythTV, for example. But the lack of support for some of the hardware I have in my system is a deal-breaker. What's the point of having a PVR/HTPC that doesn't have a working TV tuner?
So my HTPC/Media Center runs on Vista. Because in that respect, Vista is better than XP: the interface is better laid out and more intuitive. But in my experience, that's the only way in which it's better.
The essence of /. is right here in this story (Score:1, Interesting)
Slashdot is many things but news it ain't. Microsoft release a service pack for their OS. They do this because they need to change things. So they decide to use a different version number from the previous release of the OS. How on earth can that be a surprise to anyone? Please can someone explain the significance of that? When was any OS updated without the version and build numbers changing?
One of the most respected experts on Windows internals blogs all about the technical details behind the much discussed Vista copy issues, and about what MS have done to improve things with SP1. And that post languishes in the Firehose? Has anyone else here heard of Mark Russinovich? Or Sysinternals? Or is it just me?!
Re:confused (Score:1, Interesting)