Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 12th Nov 2008 22:55 UTC
Editorial Yesterday, a story made its rounds across the internet. It was picked up by many large news websites, and I'm sure it will be quoted by people until eternity. It was published by a large website, looked all fancy, it had multiple pages - it looked like it was really something. However, anyone with even the remotest bit of knowledge knows that the article was a collection of complete and utter bogus.
Permalink for comment 337171
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by MikeekiM
by MikeekiM on Thu 13th Nov 2008 02:08 UTC
Member since:

In fact, the kernel in each major new version of the Windows OS has spawned a different, typically higher number of threads. So when I examined Windows 7 and found a nearly identical thread count (97 to 100) for the System process, I knew right away that I was dealing with a minor point-type of release, as opposed to a major update or rewrite. This was not "MinWin," the mythical, streamlined new Windows kernel that promised a clean break with the bloated Vista.

Oh boy. Where on earth do I start. First of all, the number of threads running within a kernel says absolutely nothing whatsoever about how many changes have or have not gone into the kernel - in much the same way that the number of parts...

Oh boy, Thom, Your the one over the top. "The number of threads running within a kernel says absolutely nothing..." BS.

It tells you EXACTLY what the author says it tells you, was this a major rewrite of OS functionality or was it a minor update. The author points out Some Change from 97 to 100. That sounds reasonable to me given the time between releases. Looks like this guy knows what he's talking about.

Reply Score: 3