Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 22nd Feb 2007 21:24 UTC
Permalink for comment 216073
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-02-22
Also, Finchwizard, thanks for linking to part one! Before I read this, I was worried that Vista was mostly a GUI upgrade.
It's interesting how Microsoft assumes most users will be using heavy audio/video applications, and is altering their OS to support those programs better. That will definately put Windows into a unique place on the market (besides that only-OS-with-significant-support thing, that is), and keep Windows as the king of multimedia OSs.
I'm not impressed by 'symbolic links', however; I can't see the need or the use for them, although I suppose certain tasks might be made easier.
I hope that third-party vendors use the I/O priority system appropriately, because it seems like the sort of thing that many people will make assumptions about without trying to understand the reasoning behind. Additionally, I worry that if some malware author figures out a way to back-door his program's I/O into Critical priority, what seems like a good idea could be easily abused.