Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 9th Sep 2011 15:17 UTC
Windows More news on Windows 8. This time around, Gabe Aul, a director of program management in Windows, blogged about the changes Microsoft has made to Windows 8's boot process. The results are impressive - a boot time not much slower than waking from sleep on current Windows 7 and Mac OS X machines. This is, of course, a vital component of getting Windows NT ready for tablets.
Permalink for comment 489243
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: They always promise this
by sorpigal on Mon 12th Sep 2011 20:28 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: They always promise this"
sorpigal
Member since:
2005-11-02

No you weren't being supportive of Microsoft ... it was a cheapshot.

I really don't see how.

Windows Vista Service Pack 2 and Windows 7 are so stable ...

How easily you forget the 90s (and the 80s... oh my). Perhaps you just weren't there?

Considering Windows has been ported to ARM pretty easily considering it is probably in excess of 100 million lines of code actually suggests they are fucking excellent system engineers.

Portability is a positive sign, but doesn't prove much. Does that make it better designed? In terms of code structure, perhaps, but little else.

Windows NT has always been portable. Some parts of the kernel reflect good design, IMO, but there's a lot of craziness running around there, too.

Slag Microsoft off all you want ... you won't change the fact that many people use Windows everyday with zero problems

Wow, nice straw-man argument! I didn't say anything of the kind, so I don't know why you'd care to bring it up.

I have never needed to drop to the command line to fix a problem with Windows.

Aha, so you've never really had to use Windows? That explains a lot. FYI, there are a lot of things which can only be done via the command line on Windows... or (sometimes) are just much easier.

The fact is that Microsoft haters like yourself pretty much have nothing else to slag Microsoft off about other than "freedomz"

I am indeed a Microsoft hater, though how you arrive at that conclusion by reading this thread I cannot imagine. I hate Microsoft because they make things that are unpleasant, broken, break under me, are inscrutable, fragile and sometimes impossible to fix. It's not fanaticism, it's tired experience. (Full disclosure: I am also a GNU fanatic, but I am rational enough not to let my preferences color my facts to any excessive degree.)

ancient business practices (which many of the competitors have done the same which are now proponents of Linux), it isn't *nix based and that The OS doesn't run that well on computers that are considered ancient now.

Which "Ancient" practices? As far as I am aware, they've never stopped doing any of the bad things they do... except for when it no longer matters. Are you just saying "Don't complain, you didn't get screwed THIS month!"?

I do have a problem with Windows not being Unix-like: The problem is that it could be, but sometimes is arbitrarily not, and in some cases that bites me. I have a problem with getting bitten for (as far as I can tell) no good reason.

As for ancient computers... who is it you *think* you're arguing with, here? Did I claim "Windows sucks because Windows 7 doesn't run on my PII350!"? I would never be able to run Fedora 15 on it, either, but I don't complain about that very much.

Reply Parent Score: 2