OSNews

Well, I personnaly think that the pirates DO care about the FX. It is usually the pirates that have all the fancy hardware and want everything that shows it off.

Besides, the PIRATES will just find a way that enables them to run it just like they always do... it may prevent your run of the mill consumer to get the special effects to run from a disc that their friend or neighbor burnt for them but the true pirates will figure it out probably with no problem whatsoever.

Was that an admission to running pirated XP? j/k

JRM7

That reminds me of a recent upgrade I made on someone's PC. He upgraded motherboards, processor, sound card, etc. and when I tried booting XP it made me go into safe mode (I'm assuming because of driver issues) but then wouldn't let me install the drivers because XP needed to be activated and it couldn't be activated when in safe mode. Chicken meet egg. Too bad Windows repair didn't work either.

I understand the need to prevent piracy, but there comes a point where they're hurting the honest people too. Considering nearly every PC has Windows pre-installed in a legal manner I doubt they're getting hurt too much.

The non-activated state should never prevent the installation of drivers -- the two have nothing to do with each other.

Are you sure that maybe you just weren't just running as an unpriviledged user?

Nope - it was a really screwy loop. Part of it was the fault of the drivers, as they needed to boot into non-safe mode to complete install. After I did the XP repair it was worse because it still wouldn't boot into regular mode and as soon as it booted into safe mode it gave an error that repair wasn't finished and it forced a reboot.

I'm guessing the fault was that XP was loading a driver from the previous install that was blue-screening XP in normal mode no matter what I'd do.

Getting back on topic, perhaps Vista, since it's supposedly being rewritten from the kernel on down, will handle drivers in a better manner. That or I'm just spoiled by BeOS/Zeta and being able to move drives from PC to PC without dealing with these issues.

There's no such thing as anti-piracy measures which don't get in the way of regular use.

The best anti-piracy measure, and I know it sounds crazy, is to make your product worth the price, or the price meet the value of the product.
Why pirate Windows if it's $20 a machine? Why pirate it if $200 buys a license for 12 machines?
Why download music off limewire if it's $.10 a song on itunes and $5 an album at Best Buy?

Of course, some people will still pirate, I'd imagine it's not a linear curve either so there's surely some ideal point.

Treating your customers like they put bread on your table seems to be a lost art to a lot of American businesses; especially in the software industry.

We get plagued with the same ridiculousness on commercial unix software. License managers are obnoxious! Although they're much more understandable for $1K software than they are for $100 software: $1K software will generally have a dedicated admin around.

I guess it has to be stated over and over again for people like you:

Vista's GPU-powered eye candy makes your system FASTER because it lessens the graphics load on the CPU. That's the whole idea behind "hardware acceleration". You know, that thing that'ts been around for the last 15 years in the graphics world ...

It's funny how when people talk about XGL/AIGLX it's like "Wow, my video card can finally be put to use and my CPU will have more time to do other things!", but when the same people talk about Vista it's "OMG Vista is going to be wasting my clock cycles".

Get a clue.

It's funny how when people talk about XGL/AIGLX it's like "Wow, my video card can finally be put to use and my CPU will have more time to do other things!", but when the same people talk about Vista it's "OMG Vista is going to be wasting my clock cycles".

Are they really the same people? The same posters? Or is this another one of your usual anti-Linux rants.

Vista's GPU-powered eye candy makes your system FASTER because it lessens the graphics load on the CPU. That's the whole idea behind "hardware acceleration". You know, that thing that'ts been around for the last 15 years in the graphics world ...

Well I don't have a fancy gpu so I'm guessing mine would handle the old 2D system better than the newfangled one. Some cards are bound not to support the DirectX version required for Aero (what is it these days DX10?)
How about integrated graphic cards with shared memory ? I guess those will be eating more system memory than before now (probably the max allowed to store the application window contents for the new application switcher etc.).
More graphics mem in use for Aero means less for your Applications.

Get a clue.

Get a sense of humour and a dose of politeness while you're at it.

Yes, you shouldn't.

That's the sort of reply you should expect, because on one page you've refused to apologize for being rude and implied some guy has ADHD?

Seriously, calm down.


Shared cards aren't even an issue. I doubt many of them can run Aero.
Not that I can believe any technical person would stand there and argue FOR shared memory video cards.

I was replying to people who are throwing out their opinions without any technical knowledge to back it up.

Vista will eat more system RAM when used with a shared-memory graphics card? What?

It's that kind of thing that should not make it out past your teeth -- or rather your fingers. (I'm not referring to you exactly, by the way)

Actually it doesn't - it just hides how slow it is by moving the load to another part of the system.

Try running Linux with GNUstep instead of Gnome or KDE, and you'll suddenly have a system much more responding than anything MS has ever released.

Hardwareaccelerating an extremely poor design is NOT the solution, EVER!

Windows is not a real OS and it is never going to be one. It's a poor excuse written by a bunch of lamers who knew next to nothing but primitive BASIC.

And to think, I was starting to take you seriously and enjoy your posts.

Oh well, nothing lasts forever.

You should know I think much the same of Gnome/KDE

If you need 3D-hardware acceleration in order to draw two dimensional windows reasonably fast then something is terribly wrong with the design.

Systems like Windows, GNU/Linux w. Gnome/KDE have simply gotten to big and needs to be rewritten.

You should try running Gnome and KDE-apps within GNUstep (with GNUstep Workspace Manager and WindowMaker), and you'll see how this can is done right. Try opening two windows, place one above the other, and drag it around. See? That's how it's supposed to be.

Until you've done that you shouldn't attack me. You can do that when Windows can do better with less resources.

Actually, I've never seen the GUI on my NeXT redraw like it does in windows and what not and its from 1991 Drag windows over stuff with moving things in them and its still silky smooth.

Yeah

and its a 33mhz 68040 with 96mb of ram... and windows is just *now* getting this smooth.. wtf?

By using your 3D card it allows work to be taken away from the CPU for such tasks. I like the idea, especially since I can now get some use out of my 3D card for something besides games.

It's not that 3D hardware is REQUIRED in order to draw 2D windows reasonably fast -- it's that 3D hardware can draw 2D windows *faster* than 3D hardware.

Just look at your typical mid-range GPU. It probably has more transistors than your entire general-purpose CPU. Those transistors can be put to good use. That's the entire idea behind hardware acceleration.

I suppose you'll say that if you need sound-acceleration in order to play 5-channel audio reasonably well then something is terrible wrong toto, eh?

Sound requires less resources than video, so one might reply 'yes', but personally I'd expect to use hardware in order to get 5 channel audio, just like using the graphics card to draw the windows.

A lot has been moved from the CPU to the GPU with 2D-acceleration. Fact is, for Windows to draw the windows barely acceptable, it needs to use 3D-hardware acceleration. They are not doing it for fun, but because they can't get decent performance without, unless they put Windows through a thorough rewrite.

And that's the problem.

I don't know but probably Gnu step gui lacks decent AA font support and won't stand a chance when dpi independent cairo based themes are introduced. And for this kind of suff to be feasible you definately need some of 3d accel goodness.
Switch from bitmap based systems to vector IS the rewrite everyone longs for. After it's finished X will only remain a transport protocol. Whether the rewrite will be successfull (mainly in terms of hw support) is another matter.
It doesn't change the fact that GTK redraw could be better and it's slowness cannot be wholly attributed to XWindow flaws.

Actually GNUstep has fine font-antialiazing. Ever heard of FreeType

Syllable, SkyOS and AmigaOS (and some applications for OS/2) uses FreeType as well. So does AROS. Some applications for Windows also uses FreeType. For most systems following rule applies: If nothing is stated in regard to font rendering it's probably using FreeType

Actually, you don't need vectorbased, 3D-hardware accelerated drawing engine in order to handle scaling properly. It can easily and effectively be done without. It's a matter of doing it properly from the beginning. KDE and Gnome can do this pretty well actually, while Windows cannot handle it at all (scaling exists, but doesn't work well).

You gain nothing from using 3D hardware acceleration as long as you are using two dimensional vectors - but of course the moment you switch to three dimensional vectors, and starts implementing weird animations and all kinds of light effects, then of course 3D hardware acceleration will be necessary.

You need 3d hw to alpha-compose AA canvas.
Of course if you're serious about vector interfaces only vertex shader powered vector engine is up to the task.
And yes, ubiqutous animation is part of all of this.

Fast != efficient.

Huh? What are you babling about?

GNUstep is LGPL and GPL, so be happy that the most advanced technology is Free Software.

And GNUstep is efficient. Not as much as good ol' NextSTEP, but close enough. Try running Gnome/KDE on a K6 233 MHz with 96 MB of RAM and compare performance with GNUstep. GNUstep IS fast AND efficient, even if you don't like it.

But be happy that we have a FLOSS solution clearly superior to proprietary solutions

Generally, when people say fast they mean low latency. Your car is fast, that means it gets between two points in a short time. They don't care how much gas it burns to do it, it's fast.

Your code is fast, that means it finished the input before other programs. How it did it is not being discussed.


It is entirely possible for inefficient code to be faster than efficient code. And it's being done on graphics processors today. In 5 years you will not be able to get graphics to display quicker, no matter how well you design, via the CPU than you will be able to via the GPU. It's already that way today, however the systems for doing user interface graphics aren't stable yet.
And it's not more efficient code. It's simply written for specialized hardware. So yes, it's faster because it does more in less time.


Of course, if you don't want more that means little to you. But there are nice things about all the overhead being brought in for this. Things like expose become cool instead of obnoxiously slow. Things like window previews in alt+tab and off the taskbar become no big extra deal, where as before you'd have had to dedicate cycles and memory to keeping stored older shots of the window (a faulty approach at best).
You think windowmaker switches desktops fast? How quick do you think Compiz can do it without an animation? It doesn't have to redraw the windows...

Also, you'll be interested to know that it actually does, when done correctly, pull 95% of the cost of a GUI off the CPU. It comes down to queueing up some drawing commands and sending them off. Widgets, windows, compositing, off-screen stores: All on the GPU and VRAM. It's really a good thing.


Until now, in this area, fast and efficient were usually the same thing (although not always, and I'll give an example later on here). But now we're seeing code happening on different hardware, some superior for the task. And the line gets blurred.

Ok, so current example of something that's fast but inefficient: Firefox. It's quick. Setup pipelining, turn off the initial paint delay, and it's about as quick as you can get a page with a decent machine. Run it on a 233 and you'll cry!
Of course, a great example of fast and efficient there is Dillo. With the small sacrifice of css and ssl .

I've actually seen people argue about whether firefox is fast or not, and it usually comes down to one trying to redefine fast as efficient.


Of course, next we have scalable. But that's not really a concern here.

Great post, well put

Considering your profile, you are hardly qualified to define 'educated', Tom K (or should I say LinuxIsPoo? You sound like him).

Vista's GPU-powered eye candy makes your system FASTER

One of the dumbest things I've ever read here. Congratulations. If it makes your computer so much FASTER than classic mode, how come you need an Alienware just to run it?

So If i want to play a game in windows mode it will SUCK because the UI is now using the GPU ASWELL as the Game or will it downgrade the UI to non GPU mode in this scenario or is this an option?

No. DX 10 demos in Microsoft internally have shown 8-10 times the performance on apps running on D 10 compared to DX 9. I am quoting this so how true it is I am not sure but if a beyond3d board members believe it I do as well because they have valid arguments and enough knowledge to back their opinions up.

When games run, there will be no need for the UI so obviously the GPU wont be working on driving the UI. Consider a Mac machine playing Doom 3...what happens to their GUI driven UI? Same principle applies.

Wrong, some games do run with a UI and most can be changed to run in a window instead of fullscreen.

If you are the owner of a key that is blacklisted (it happens accidently sometimes) or your key was leaked. Is it so easy to get it unblocked or a new key? I bet its not if you are a end user of a retail edition (OEM is not a problem most likely) or what if you are a VLK it shouldnt be a problem either just a headache.

Uh, so it'd be like running two instances of a game? Thus, it would hinder performance, would it not? Either way, there IS a performance decrease and I'd have to imagine using the GPU, which by all means should be used for 3D gaming/application.

Number 2 I agree with. It's not that hard to press 'Next' until you've registered. Activation, however, is quite annoying. "Hey Microsoft, I upgraded a few parts in my computer, is that cool?"

Two instances of a game? Are you talking about when you're running the Vista UI and then try running a modern 3d game? Because when you do, the vista UI, desktop composition is disabled until you're done.

Spot on - I see no negatives and lots of positives on that list.. but then I consider turning luna, shadows and windows animations off in XP a 'must have' - WISH you could do that in OSX without having to run MORE software bloating it out even more. Turning all that crap off would be first on my list of to-do's after a vista install.

Of course, much like their previous attempts at protection schemes does anyone REALLY think a crack won't hit within a week of the release, if not sooner?

Like the WGA - which has proven SO effective. (not)

I'm gonna admit to something funny here - I run XP cracked. EVEN THOUGH I OWN IT LEGITIMATELY... because for me the bullshit hoops you have to jump through regarding it's behavior over simple things like swapping certain elements of the system hardware (like hard drives, CPU or video card) much less software upgrades; it's just simpler to crack the damn thing than it is to deal with their crap. (especially given the behavior of 'legitimate' XP installs when you rip out Outlook and Messenger by the balls)

I'm gonna admit to something funny here - I run XP cracked. EVEN THOUGH I OWN IT LEGITIMATELY...
------------

Thats one step better than me. I own XP legitimately and I just downloaded the corporate edition and use it. Its just another case of the pirated copy of software/movies/music/etc... providing an easier ownership experience than legitimate copies.

I also own Photoshop and resorted to using an activation keygen upon installation. Now with new movie formats on the horizon, all the DRM stuff is actually turning me off to making purchases. I'll stick to DVDs or illegal copying of them unless someone out there can provide patches to give me a trouble free product with no DRM.

>> I've swapped out a CPU, video cards, sound cards, hard drives, mice, keyboards, and buttload of USB devices, and have never had it bark at me once.

So you've never gotten the 'hardware change detected - Windows invalidated' message? Haven't used up your 'alloted' changes yet? I blew those out on my secondary hard drives alone.

I find that kind of surprising, but then I do have a 3 month upgrade cycle on my machine.

Oh, and I even had it do it once after a power supply upgrade, and even after a BIOS upgrade... and don't even get me STARTED about WGA's issues with multi-boot.

Considering the life of a PC on a store shelf is 2 months before changes and they want to invalidate hardware after some changes. Go figure.

I've swapped out a CPU, video cards, sound cards, hard drives, mice, keyboards, and buttload of USB devices, and have never had it bark at me once.
------

I upgraded a sound card a while back and upon start up I had to reactivate. So I go to activate, and I am told I need to call MS for my activation. To make things worse, I am stuck waiting for 20 minuts for someone to talk to me. In this sort of situation, I expect that I wait no more than 5 minutes.

Now I run corporate edition and things are great.

I upgraded a sound card a while back and upon start up I had to reactivate. So I go to activate, and I am told I need to call MS for my activation. To make things worse, I am stuck waiting for 20 minuts for someone to talk to me. In this sort of situation, I expect that I wait no more than 5 minutes.

So you got the product activation thing after changing only a soundcard? On one of my boxes, I started off with an internal sound card. I disabled that and installed a Turtle Beach Catalina. Took that out and put in an SB Live Audigy 2 Platimum (with an external part in one of the CD drive bays), and it didn't even blink at me. I've also replaced a PCI TNT2 card with a Geforce4 MX in that same machine.

So you got the product activation thing after changing only a soundcard?
---------

Yep. I was quite surprised that it happened. I went from a Sound Blaster Live to a Sound Blaster Audigy Platinum.

And even if it did, it would probably take less time to get it running than it would to hunt down the corporate version and install that.

Less time to get it working than finding a corporate version and reinstall, yes. Less time than finding the activation crack that rips part of Winlogon.exe out, no. That takes about 15 seconds, the patching process included.

So it's Microsofts fault that people pirate Windows to keep the dominance on the desktop?

I'm sorry, but that's ludicrious.

Because the DOJ told them no on XP.

I don't think they're doing it this way for any other reason than to say: "This is not required to get full use of the system and applications for it, just to make it work better." That way, when the EU and DOJ come tell them that taking customers private information to continue using a product they've, more or less, used for 20 years isn't right; they can say they don't have to give their information.

I don't think Microsoft honestly cares if people in China pirate Windows. They're at a loss there simply because:
1.) They can sell at a price that's affordable there, and then be consistently yelled at at home.
2.) Sell at the same price, and no one in China can afford it (by no one I mean 95% of the population).

They'll simply use it as an excuse to try and fight casual piracy in industrialized countries and major piracy (corporate) in China.


Honestly, if this thing works, takes no private info, and doesn't cause more than 5 minutes of inconvenience it's fine with me.
I guarantee it won't work though . It'll have obnoxious conditions like: Never lose this 25 digit code. You need a new code for the new version. You can only install on one computer, please call.

The funny thing is it won't work for long.

There will probably be a piracy version of final Vista with support for Aero, before the final Vista is released.

That's has been the case before with Windows and I don't see why it would be different this time. Doesn't work too well with XP AFAICT from friends (running a perfectly legal copy myself through MSDN AA, just so you know I don't use piracy software - I usually use GPL'ed software whenever I can).

"All the different versions of Windows"?

http://distrowatch.com/search.php?category=All&origin=All&basedon=A...

Have you seen that lately?

Are you sick of the Versions of Windows? So i imagine that you dont use linux(300+++ Distros)

Great post!

Everyone with eyes should know this, it's how they got into the government etc. Giving people a product cheap or free and then locking them in. I wish I could do that!

If they can get a pirate to pay $5 for one of their products they are making money (That's $5 more then they would have gotten!)

But yet when Linux is given for free MS claims it's communism! LOL! Boy oh boy!

They should call it Crack-dows. LOL! “It gets you hooked even though it's not good for you”

"if it bleeds, we can kill it"...heh, agreed

yeah, it's not like it took long for a hack of the genuine advantage for XP to get hacked anyway.

If they really wanted, they could make it effective. By checking authenticity of serial number on their servers. But Microsoft is too clever to prevent all pirate versions from running or getting updated.

WGA was intended only for those who aren't capable to switch to alternative OS themselves but will buy Windows if pirate version stops updating. However their unupdated Windows might get flooded by malware very quickly and leave very bad impressions about the OS.

There's likely:
1.) Encryption to be dealt with.
2.) A challenge response mechanism happening.
3.) Quality of response checking, where it actually needs to be unique and logical each time to your situation; and match the challenge, and be encrypted with the right key for this connection.

I'm not saying no one will ever crack it. Just saying it's unlikely Microsoft has written this so that you could crack it with packet sniffing and a quick socket code.


Anyway, I think the best thing Microsoft could do is make you give your name. People get nervous about writing their name, address, and social security number in when they're pirating software.
Of course, the DOJ told microsoft it couldn't do this. Oh, and no one wants to give someone their soc when it's utterly unecessary.

Ok, ok, Aunt Tillie might give her soc.

Those with video cards that work with Aero will experience a snappier system because most of the graphics processing will be offloaded to the GPU. Those without capable video cards will simply not get Aero, and no performance penalty.

It's a win-win situation.

I'm not so sure this is so much about preventing piracy, but rather about getting user informaiton from actual paying customers. Information that Microsoft and perhaps their partners can use to better target their customers. Pirates will not buy any software, so they are not interesting to Microsoft.

I wouldn't be surprised if there would be some kind of checkbox on the registraiton page where the user grante Microsoft the rights to sell or share their information. That checkbox will most likely be checked by default and placed in some hard to see place.

really the only "improvements" are....

1. the graphics.
2. the security that *should* have been in xp.

makes you wonder what the heck microsoft has been doing all these years while developing it. No wonder they had to delay it so many times.

oh wait i know what they have been doing. they have been doing destructive things to their windows os, that will only hurt their market share.

1. they have been adding DRM, they know customers don't like it.
2. they have been reordering the ui, which will only confuse their customers.
3. they have been devising copy protection schemes that probably won't stop any piracy, but will definately serve to annoy their paying customers.

i have already switched to linux.

They are collapsing under weight of their own legacy. They are just paying for all crappy architectural solutions they've put down to their customers in the past.

If you don't know what you are talking about, please refrain from commenting.

"...unless you have a better idea don't dis the current one"

I don't see why I, or anyone else, should be prevented from pointing out legitimate concerns with some system simply because I have not produced a better one. It is not my job to make a better solution. It is in Microsoft's best interests to listen to criticism; it is also in our interests to make the cricitisms reasonable, but that does not call for a blanket ban on negative comments.

As it is, any system which needs to contact some higher authority is to some extent flawed: why should I be forced to have my machine connected to the internet? Is that a reasonable requirement?

Given MS's unprecedented market dominance, they should be held up to even higher standards than other companies to avoid abuse of privilege, and if they propose a frankly unreasonable system we should say so, and we should not be expected to propose a solution. After all, we did not force them to choose their cuurent business model, did we?

"I don't see why I, or anyone else, should be prevented from pointing out legitimate concerns with some system simply because I have not produced a better one. It is not my job to make a better solution. It is in Microsoft's best interests to listen to criticism; it is also in our interests to make the cricitisms reasonable, but that does not call for a blanket ban on negative comments. "

My friend, criticism without supplying a possible solution is just plain whining and complaining.

Don't get me wrong I am no MS fanboy, but I am willing to bet that no matter what MS does will not make you or all the other MS haters out there happy. Short of making Windows GPL you will never be happy with MS.

Most novelties vista will offer are for developers. And they will make the switch compelling by offering cool Vista-only apps.
If you look at the big picture it always used to be like that. In terms of user experience (ignoring nonfunctional virtues) W98 is was enough already for most people.

Ugh.. 98. Yeah, I guess it was enough for most people. We don't *really* need the stuff newer operating systems offer, but that are a nice convenience.

98 had horrible stability, a really bad color management systems.. and worst of all, it was the 9x kernel.

If you don't know what you're talking about, please refrain from posting.

"If you don't know what you're talking about, please refrain from posting."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humor

If you couldn't tell, there's a very thin line around here, and it's very hard to tell humor from someone who is just clueless.

Not to be rude, but you need to be more clear when it's intended as humor, because there are people on here that would say what you did with a straight face.

Is is remotely possible that you spend entirely too much time and effort defending MS any and all perceived criticisms against/jokes about Windows in thread after thread at this site?

Look at what I said. There are many people here who would say what he said with a perfectly straight face. This site is supposed to be meant for serious discussion (not that we can't joke), so something like that will be presumed to be serious unless (a) it's stated it's a joke (b) whoever is reading the comment knows the person and knows they are joking

Follow now?

Not to be rude, but if you didn't automatically replied everytime someone was critical of Windows, you wouldn't make these kind of mistakes.

I personally saw it as humor right away. I know you don't want to be represented as a MS apologist, but you'd help your cause if you didn't constantly jump to Microsoft defense...

MS is better than Google so there. My mom said so.

I guess the question is what isnt better than Google (aside from searching)...

I guess you haven't noticed that I've been critical of MS a lot more than usual lately

Why do you keep bringing that up though? Does it bother you that I defend Microsoft a lot (but not always)?

I haven't noticed that. Only your usual attacks on IE7, which is funny because we sort of switch around 180 degrees, with me 'defending' MS and you attacking it.:P

Intentionally cutting you down before this turns into a cat fight.

It was pretty obvious the original parent was kidding. Generally, if a reply is one line, it's either wholly amazing or wholly joking.

And I think I have caught you giving Microsoft a hard time. You're not on my OSN Microsoft apologist list.

Fair enough. Maybe my perception is just off because of work lately.

But I think most people would agree with me that there are people on here that would say what he said with a straight face. That was my point.

Thanks for the kind words.

Corp version will also not have fancy bits on it. ie., Eye candy.

I can't edit my post for some reason. I just wanted to add that the VLK version is no different than the normal Pro version sans activation so why on earth would it not have the fancy bits? There is no "Corporate" version, there's no such thing. It's just a normal version that uses Volume License keys and doesn't require activation.

Server editions did not run DX too well no? etc. That sets the pattern for Vista SKU builds. The business ones will most likely not come with eye candy and other bits n boobles not needed to do business things.

Incorrect, Server 2003 SP1 includes DirectX 9.0c, and the VLK version is just XP Professional. As you know XP Pro does have the Luna style and all the eye candy turned on.

Im running Enterprise Server 2003 on a machine and Google Earth just wont work in Dx mode.

You have to enable hardware acceleration; open Display Properties, click the Settings tab and then the Advanced tab. Now click the Troubleshoot tab and turn hardware acceleration all the way up. Now run DXDiag and make sure Direct3D is enabled.

The VLK version of XP most certainly does have WGA protection, and besides what XP does or does not have doesn't have anything to do with what Vista will.

The VLK version of XP most certainly does have WGA protection,

But it doesn't have Product Activation, which is much more insideous and invasive.

Why would you want an OPERATING SYSTEM running on a MANAGED FRAMEWORK?

As far as the included apps/tools in Windows, porting them to .Net takes a LOT of resources (for development, testing, etc).

Them not using .Net more has little to nothing to do with it's "state".

Yes I would like the "SUPPORTING FEATURES / TOOLS / APPS (notepad etc)" working under a managed framework. Indeed yes! There is no reason "APPLICATION" code should be unmanaged these days.

What I meant is the core OS stuff should not be managed, but "supporting" apps should. But that's a lot of resources and will take a while. Sometimes it might not even be worth it.

>> Even "notepad" is "old skool" Win32.

I wouldn't go THAT far, it's more like a sloppy recompile of the Win16 version with no actual code changes - which is why it still can't handle files >64k.

That's incorrect.

All versions of Notepad on NT can handle files larger than 64KB. It could in NT4, and in Win2K, and it can in XP and 2K3.

Only on Win9x/ME is there a 64 KB limition.