Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 22nd Oct 2007 13:48 UTC
Windows Earlier today, OSNews ran a story on a presentation held by Microsoft's Eric Traut, the man responsible for the 200 or so kernel and virtualisation engineers working at the company. Eric Traut is also the man who wrote the binary translation engine for in the earlier PowerPC versions of VirtualPC (interestingly, this engine is now used to run XBox 1 [x86] games on the XBox 360 [PowerPC]) - in other words, he knows what he is talking about when it comes to kernel engineering and virtualisation. His presentation was a very interesting thing to watch, and it offered a little bit more insight into Windows 7, the codename for the successor to Windows Vista, planned for 2010.
Permalink for comment 279841
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
This isnt new
by cchance on Mon 22nd Oct 2007 15:13 UTC
Member since:

Microsofts been working with the idea of a new codebase for well.... forever vista was to be the new codebase with a ground up restructuring but it was pushed off due partly to stockholders impatience.

It's good to see microsoft evolving and looking to the future.

Windows isnt dead it just needs a major garbage cleaning, you don't throw out code that works XP was one of the best OS's in history especially since SP2.

The issue is Vista didn't do enough to move further than XP, it was XP SP3.5 perhaps but not the OS that microsoft had invisioned. They did a lot to make it close to what they wanted but their not getting the help they need.

The new TCP stack is great but only really if router and isp's work to implement the needed protocols and the fact is most arent.

The new Graphics architecture is great if the drivers support it and the hardware, but the problem is ATI nor Nvidia can produce fast stable drivers for their lives.

The new systems for increasing speed like the hybrid drives is great but only if the hardware and drivers support it, which to date neither has really been accomplished.

The new UAC works it really does, but it's very obvious a 1.0 attempt at it. It's in my view a great move it's just not a move that was 100% worked out, the fact that running installs requires a ok window before the secure UAC even launches is pretty much proof of that.

The new sandboxed environments is a wicked move, something even apple didnt do for safari and im very thankful microsoft did it for IE, but if we can't easily lock applications in sandboxes by themselves when needed then its effect is not as great... its also a 1.0 move

Reply Score: 2