Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

First Details of Windows 7 Emerge

Posted by ryuzaki0 on 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.

6 of 615 comments (clear)

  1. Rinse, Repeat by orkysoft · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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?

    --

    I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
  2. I wonder... by larry+bagina · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  3. Seems to coincide with patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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

    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

  4. That's just sooo not gonna fly by melted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:That's just sooo not gonna fly by Bryan+Ischo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They aren't losers in the sense of making money, but they are losers in the sense of being poor engineers.

      No, I don't think the priority should be a new version of paint. You are completely missing the point. I am saying that with the resources Microsoft has, they should be able to produce a very, very good operating system, cutting edge and advanced in almost every way, and STILL have enough money left over to do things like update Paint. And after all that, still have $billions of dollars in the bank.

      If MS Windows came with a good image manipulation program, there still wouldn't be anything preventing you from buying a better one if you wanted to. And, if Microsoft didn't suck at writing operating systems so badly, it would be a very easy to set option to decide at install time what features you wanted and what you didn't.

      Are you saying that having NO choice is better than having SOME choice? Or that Microsoft's productivity *isn't* pathetic given their resources?

  5. Re:that sounds good but.. by Daengbo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just yesterday I was on some site (CNET, I think) and was going to flame someone who posted that "OSX is not LIKE Unix, it IS Unix." Sure, it has BSD wedged in there over Mach, I thought, but that's not Unix. It's POSIX compliant, but not Unix. It wasn't actually based on BSD.

    Then I went to check my facts. I found this visual history, and OSX was nowhere on there. Great, I thought. I just need one more link to cement my position. Then I found the Open Group's list, and damn, I was wrong again. OSX 10.5 is Unix 03. Sucks to be me.

    --
    Put identity in the browser.