Slashdot Mirror


First Details of Windows 7 Emerge

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.

11 of 615 comments (clear)

  1. Good intentions by _merlin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Good intentions by mblase · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.
    2. Re:Good intentions by dhasenan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you can't handle it, port the application to a more recent version of Windows.

      If the application is sixteen years old, it should have system requirements that would be considered trivial by today's standards, so virtualization or emulation shouldn't cause as much of a performance hit. Instead, the application would perform as if it had been written today.

  2. So what? by foo+fighter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    --
    obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
  3. ah! just in time by boxlight · · Score: 4, Insightful
    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 tricks to dissuade buyers from going with attractive alternatives.

  4. Re:that sounds good but.. by falcon5768 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of Apples biggest wins with controlling the hardware AND the software is this very fact... they have phased out legacy equipment and software every so many years.

    --

    "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

  5. Virtualised Legacy by Kenshin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    --

    Does it make you happy you're so strange?

  6. Re:Rinse, Repeat by ozmanjusri · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Why is this modded troll?

    Microsoft are the kings of targeted vapourware.

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

    --
    "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  7. Re:That's just sooo not gonna fly by Bryan+Ischo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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!

  8. Oh God... by andreyw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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 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.

  9. Re:That's just sooo not gonna fly by fwarren · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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)

    --
    vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.