Linked by on Tue 27th May 2008 15:00 UTC
Windows So far, Microsoft has been very tight-lipped about Windows 7, carefully trying to prevent another Longhorn PR disaster where the company promised the heavens and more for Longhorn, but in the end ditched Longhorn to make way for Vista. Chris Flores (Windows Client Communications Team) as well as Steven Sinofsky, has broken the silence a little bit to talk about Windows 7. In addition, it is believed Windows 7 will make its first official debut at the D6 All Things Digital conference today, during a keynote held by Steve Ballmer and Bill Gates.
Permalink for comment 315836
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Another Missed Opportunity
by phoehne on Tue 27th May 2008 20:24 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Another Missed Opportunity"
phoehne
Member since:
2006-08-26

Actually real time behaviors are becoming important for things outside the traditional RTOS. For example, it's can be used in simulations and games to make for a more responsive, more realistic experience. In the financial community soft real time behaviors are becoming part of trading systems. In addition, as embedded systems just become more like little (SoC) versions of desktop systems, a stripped down desktop version of the O/S is nice to use because it simplifies development. I just pointed out real time scheduling as one thing the standard Windows kernel lacks that's available in a number of other kernels. For example, both Linux and Solaris come with real time schedulers (not just a special RTLinux).

But I don't see your connection between the OS that's in your cash register and your desktop OS and why you'd have to upgrade your cash register or your business processes if you upgrade your desktop. For example, say your cash register runs Windows CE, or your service station pump head runs Windows XP embedded, it has nothing to do with your desktop OS. What's more, if you do build a medical imager with Windows XP embedded, you probably will not ever upgrade it to Windows Vista, anyway. You don't need to keep the entire kernel the same to provide for backwards compatibility. As many people have pointed out, you can run the legacy Windows version in a virtual machine. That gives you the freedom to build a solid, next generation kernel while satisfying your user needs to run old code. Their current strategy ties them to old code while constraining their ability to modernize their key product.

There are two ways of looking at the present Windows situation. The first is the odd/even phenomena. Windows 3.1 - successful. Windows 3.5.1 Not so. Windows NT 4 - successful. Windows 2000 not so. Windows XP successful. Windows Vista not so. That may mean they get all their ducks in a row and Windows 7 continues the pattern by being successful. The pessimists (of which I am a part) look and see real issues with where Windows is and where it's headed. Microsoft could turn into the GM of operating systems, producing generations of mediocre products, slowly loosing just a little bit of market share every year. That kind of slow grind to mediocrity will be very expensive for end users.

Edited 2008-05-27 20:26 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3