Windows 7 Won't Have Compact "MinWin" Kernel 580
An anonymous reader points us to an interview Microsoft's Windows 7 development chief, Steven Sinofsky, did with CNet. He reveals that Windows 7 will be a further evolution of Vista, and will lose the rumored MinWin kernel. "We're very clear that drivers and software that work on Windows Vista are going to work really well on Windows 7; in fact, they'll work the same. We're going to not introduce additional compatibilities, particularly in the driver model. Windows Vista was about improving those things. We are going to build on the success and the strength of the Windows Server 2008 kernel, and that has all of this work that you've been talking about. The key there is that the kernel in Windows Server 08 is an evolution of the kernel in Windows Vista, and then Windows 7 will be a further evolution of that kernel as well."
MINWIN IS NOT A NEW KERNEL! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Cynical First Post (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Steve Jobs (Score:3, Informative)
Re:hmmmmm Vista... powershell ... winfs..... etc (Score:5, Informative)
http://blogs.msdn.com/winfs/archive/2006/06/23/644706.aspx [msdn.com]
Re:Cynical First Post (Score:5, Informative)
Re:..and will lose the rumored MinWin kernel. (Score:3, Informative)
Write a new, well-designed OS. Include a minimalist Win32 environment in a VM sandbox. Basically, Wine for Windows to run legacy apps.
Apple has done it twice.
Re:Guarranteed To Suck (Score:5, Informative)
That's so so so not my experience in the market.
There's much more demand (as measured by people trying to hire me to use the appropriate technology) currently for my
Re:So the difference is... (Score:5, Informative)
Do you remember the last time you had a steak? [...]
I don't know where you eat your steak, but if it's doing that to you, you should go somewhere else...
Re:So? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:..and will lose the rumored MinWin kernel. (Score:2, Informative)
MacOS Classic -> MacOS X (basically the same as DOS-based Windows -> Windows NT, only a bit over half a decade later). What's the second one ?
Re:hmmmmm Vista... powershell ... winfs..... etc (Score:5, Informative)
Agreed about Windows for the last ten years, but the new Ubuntu just works. And I am a long-time Windows user that has tinkered with Linux since the 300 MHz days, constantly hearing about how it was the "year of the Linux desktop".
But I had a 1GHz laptop with XP that locked up all the time. I could never find the culprit (probably a driver or IRQ issue). I installed Ubuntu, it found all the hardware automatically, asked me my WAP password and away I went. It's fast and usable now, instead of slow and unreliable.
I don't know any such thing. I was at three companies where everyone was upgraded to XP. People loved XP. Businesses waited for the correct timing in their budget, but there was little doubt that it WOULD be adopted. Vista is universally reviled and most businesses I know are saying that they will NEVER go to it.
I also value my time and have no problem spending a couple hundred on a new OS. But having dealt with Vista and Ubuntu Hardy Heron I would say that Ubuntu is way more hardware compatible and takes far less time to set up and install. And seeing how difficult it is to get software to run on Vista, it won't be long before Linux is more software-compatible as well.
Fully 40% of my software in my business wouldn't run on it without major work (and many of these were Microsoft titles), about 25% never did run at all. Every software install on the test machine was a pray-and-hack affair. It was exactly as if I was trying to get the software to run on Wine or Mono, instead of Windows.
Linux has easily passed Windows in hardware compatibility. Who ever thought we would see that day? Now the attention will go to software compatibility, and when Wine and Mono improve a little bit more, Linux will have the advantage there as well.
And I predict that it will happen before Windows 7 comes out.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Hiden IE everywhere (Score:2, Informative)
I remember installing the IE4 desktop update on my 486/66 with 8Mb RAM, running original Win95a, and it made a BIG impact on performance - suddenly folder windows took 10 seconds to open instead of being nearly instant.
Interestingly, MS appeared to quietly drop it in later IE versions. If IE5 or 5.5 are installed on a clean Win95a, the "desktop update" is not offered as an installation option.
MinWin clarification... (Score:2, Informative)
Eric Traut's speech at UIUC got a lot of attention but has been largely misinterpreted. The interview at http://edge.technet.com/Media/567/ [technet.com] explains the relationship between Server Core and MinWin, and if you're interested in the subject matter, is worth watching (at the very least, for the inadvertent use of night vision by the cameraman).
Brendan
nitpick (Score:3, Informative)