Slashdot Mirror
Vista's Graphics To Be Moved Out of the Kernel
Tiberius_Fel writes "TechWorld is running an article saying that Vista's graphics will not be in the kernel. The goal is obviously to improve reliability, alongside the plan to make most drivers run in user mode." From the article: "The shift of the UI into user mode also helps to make the UI hardware independent - and has already allowed Microsoft to release beta code of the UI to provide developers with early experience. IT also helps make it less vulnerable to kernel mode malware that could take the system down or steal data. In broader terms, this makes Windows far more like Linux and Unix - and even the MacOS - where the graphics subsystem is a separate component, rather than being hard-wired into the OS kernel."
MS hasn't bought Citrix. They do, however, license technology from them to provide Terminal Services/Remote Desktop.
Microsoft has already responded to this article by saying that nothing has changed: http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,2180,190 2540,00.asp
Slightly Incorrect. Doom 3 and Quake 4 both use OpenGL.
What does one cow say to the other? Moo.
SCO didn't purchase Unix rights until 1995, and Windows NT 3.1 was released in 1993. Plus, I've never heard of any agreement that would have prevented Windows NT from being a fully compliant Unix. They even built it with swappable OS subsystems so they could go that route if the market demanded it. There was even a third party vendor that sold a really good Unix subsystem several years ago, but the name escapes me.
As for advanced features, I think the GP is referring to things like the swappable OS subsystems; a hybrid micro-kernel; a strong and flexible access control model; a highly portable hardware abstraction layer supporting three widely different architectures; and an extremely versatile file-system. This was all really groundbreaking in the early 1990's and a lot of it is still very impressive from a design and engineering perspective. Plus this is back when MS was the versatile upstart that was challenging the clunky proprietary Unixes of its day. MS was much friendlier back in those days too, as they were doing a lot more embracing and a lot less extending.
The tragedy of Windows NT is that MS became too dominant and its direction changed. As a result many of the kernel's greatest features were never really visible through the layers of crap piled on top. The Win32 subsystem eliminated the competition and brought us abominations like pseudo-handles and a truly evil GDI. The hybrid micro-kernel became suspiciously monolithic as it absorbed the GDI, Win32 subsystem, and anything else in the name of performance. The exceptional access control model was all but ignored by the majority of software developers, with even enterprise developers doing a poor job of supporting secure multi-user access. The hardware abstraction layer slowly evaporated as support dwindled to only x86. The advanced functionality of the file-system was never utilized much, in order to maintain parity the bastard family line known as Win9x. And so the operating system crystallized to what it is today.
So I'm glad to see that Windows NT is finally headed back to its roots and picking up some old initiatives. Vista will finally push secure multi-user access (LUA) and kick the GDI's ass out of the kernel. I was very unimpressed by MS a few years ago, and I'm always extremely suspicious of them. But it really looks like they're headed in the right direction with respect to security and stability, and I don't think anyone should begrudge them that. That stated, I'm also very happy that we now have viable and, in some scenarios, superior and more affordable alternatives to the Windows platform. As far as I'm concerned the consumer's options are just continuing to get better.