Linked by David Adams on Tue 12th Jul 2005 15:32 UTC, submitted by Wim van Buuren
Windows Longhorn will have some new features that will be particularly interesting for hardware hackers: The Windows System Assessment Tool (WinSat) is basically a built-in benchmarking tool that should help with determining what affect a new component is having on the system, and another, unnamed feature looks for hardware changes on boot, and, if it finds any, will restart the hardware configuration process.
Order by: Score:
nice
by JrezIN on Tue 12th Jul 2005 15:51 UTC
JrezIN
Member since:
2005-06-29

That nice.

So... is it another influence of ex-Be engineers around redmond? =^]

Reply Score: 1

v Command-Line
by Knuckles on Tue 12th Jul 2005 15:51 UTC
Another crash-ware feature
by sniperu on Tue 12th Jul 2005 16:00 UTC
sniperu
Member since:
2005-07-01

Just like every revolutionary new "automation" found in windows through the years this will be another source for headakes .

Just like autodiscovery and driver instalation of usb devices (especially printers). It kinda' works (the 10% of the time you actually have the drivers in your system) but gives you such touble when things go wrong ... And they do !

Reply Score: 3

RE: Another crash-ware feature
by JrezIN on Tue 12th Jul 2005 16:14 UTC in reply to "Another crash-ware feature"
JrezIN Member since:
2005-06-29

I may be wrong... but seen that the only difference in this new "feature" is that the system will boot faster not looking for new devices. If a new device's found, the system will just do the same as now. The only difference is the OS trying to understand the hardware to make the appropriate changes in system config, like the eye candy level and video resolution for example... (Or more drastic changes in case of motherboard changes... it won't trust the previous config/registry all the time)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Another crash-ware feature
by Knuckles on Tue 12th Jul 2005 17:59 UTC in reply to "RE: Another crash-ware feature"
Knuckles Member since:
2005-06-29

They already do that, at least to a great extent.

Try this little experiment: remove a hd with windows xp from a computer, and plug it in on a computer with a different chipset, or sufficiently different hardware. You get a blue screen faster that you can blink. Why? Instead of probing the system, they load most of the crap right away.

And I think that it's bogus most kinds of self-configuring stuff like this. Just look at the genetic algorithm patches that are in some testing linux kernels, it's nice and very interesting, great idea, but in reality, it gets you like 2% performance, max.

Reply Score: 1

Better errors would be nice
by StephenBeDoper on Tue 12th Jul 2005 16:16 UTC
StephenBeDoper
Member since:
2005-07-06

I'd be happy if Windows just gave more descriptive error messages. I shouldn't have to google a bluescreen error code to find out if a crash was caused by bad RAM or a problem with the video card driver, etc.

My personal favourite recently came when trying to import settings in Outlook Express. "Settings could not be imported because an error has occurred." Thanks a lot, that's really bloody useful.

Reply Score: 5

v CD...
by Anonymous on Tue 12th Jul 2005 16:55 UTC
v Longhorn far from usable
by Anonymous on Tue 12th Jul 2005 17:19 UTC
v w1nd0wz
by Anonymous on Tue 12th Jul 2005 18:23 UTC
yay
by Anonymous on Tue 12th Jul 2005 19:30 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Yet more automatic "features" with the possibility to fuck up your system at will, without the slightest provocation.. I can't wait.

Reply Score: 0

realy funny...
by hobgoblin on Tue 12th Jul 2005 21:21 UTC
hobgoblin
Member since:
2005-07-06

that while you could in theory rip any win9x disk out of one machine and put it into another, trying to do the same with a win2k or later will end in a bluescreen all to often.

how hard is it to detect a driver failure and try to load a generic one that supports the most basic of functions?

Reply Score: 1

RE: realy funny...
by Andrew Youll on Tue 12th Jul 2005 21:29 UTC
Andrew Youll
Member since:
2005-06-29

I personally believe it is part of MS's lockin strategy, XP is most likely blue screening due to the Activation UID generated from hardware components of the machine XP was installed on, in Win2k is it possible the system was first tested on Win2k?

Reply Score: 5

Benefit
by Anonymous on Tue 12th Jul 2005 21:40 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

"...and another, unnamed feature looks for hardware changes on boot, and, if it finds any, will restart the hardware configuration process".


And it will report the changes to Microsoft and force the user to reactive Windows.

Reply Score: 0

crystalattice
Member since:
2005-07-06

I find the benchmarking program to be interesting, but I'm sure the numbers won't mean anything. I mean, it's not like they'll be compatible to Winstone, Sandrasoft, et al. Without a "true" benchmark how do you know what it all means? What if you want to compare your system to a friend's who has just upgraded his mobo but is running XP?

The device checker just sounds like a BSOD waiting to happen. What happens if the Registry gets corrupted? Will the system be in a perpetual reboot loop?

Reply Score: 1

Anonymous Member since:
---

WinSat isn't meant to benchmark between computers, only between hardware changes...

P.S. For the summary, the noun is "effect", the verb is "affect".

Reply Score: 0

My linux dstro
by Anonymous on Wed 13th Jul 2005 04:45 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Mandriva / Mandrake linux has been doing this since 2002 or sooner!

Reply Score: 0

Linux already had this years ago!
by Anonymous on Wed 13th Jul 2005 08:00 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

"Linux has been doing this for 10 years already!"

Sorry, just wanted to act like a stupid ass moron linusux user.

No matter what Microsoft puts into windows, Apple or Linux invented it first or it will screw up your system so it's worthless.

Sorry, again sounding like a masturbating linsux troll.

Honestly, I think this is great and should be a great improvement. Nice Job Microsoft. Tell these trolls to bugger off.

Reply Score: 0

Anonymous Member since:
---

"No matter what Microsoft puts into windows, Apple or Linux invented it first or it will screw up your system so it's worthless. "

The gui wasnt in linux first (and linux people are still trying to get their heads out of their a$$'s when it comes to gui design) (and yes, I know the gui wasnt in windows first either). What exactly did linux invent first? Cant think of a single thing. Linux is just a clone of unix, cant think of a single unique gui idea, its basicly designed around windows with a few graphical differences (everything is in about the same place with the same functionality). Seriously, what exactly has linux done that wasnt done by either Be, MacOS, Unix, or Windows first?

Reply Score: 0