To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
It is here;
http://www.smarthouse.com.au/Computing/Platforms?Article=/Computing...
The article claims 60% but Microsoft denied it immediately and stated that only 40% was needed rewritten, and that this is being transferred over to the Xbox team.
Read about that at ;
http://msdn.microsoft.com/developercenters/
1. Your MSDN link is a very generic directory link: which page did you have in mind for people to view? A worthless link in practice.
2. That Smart House "article" is written at about the level of quality a huge amount of stuff posted/linked to here on OSNews is: shoddy writing, either in spelling or on content and correctness. Any supposedly "professional" article should be proofread and spellchecked, lest easy-to-spot dumb mistakes like this direct quote happen, which any spellchecker would catch:
"Microsoft has also admitted that it has major problems in it's Windows division and has has immediatly initiated a total restructure of the division, a move that comes after a costly delay in rolling out its Vista program."
Did you catch the missing 'e' in a certain word? I certainly did!
Now, go back to their first sentence at the top of the article, which says:
"Up to 60% of the code in the new consumer version of Microsoft new Vista operating system is set to be rewritten as the Company "scrambles" to fix internal problems a Microsoft insider has confirmed to SHN."
Now, carefully read everything below with that article: absolutely nothing supports the statement of 60% of all Vista code needs to be rewritten, when taken in context later on when they mention media and entertainment stuff as needing to be rewritten, which most certainly is not 60% of the Vista code by lines of code or total system functionality: the most reasonable conclusion is that up to (maybe, if that: again, there's no quote to support their claims) 60% of that limited subset of Vista code (the media and entertainment stuff) needs to be rewritten.
David Richards was pulling stuff out of his butt when he gave that headline quote: I'd suggest you not be his bathroom servant and wipe his butt and grab it without question 




Member since:
2006-05-23
Where do you get the 40% figure? I once saw an article here to that effect, but it turned out to be bogus. You're probably quite right about the RAM consumption though, that's already a huge problem for XP.
(FWIW, you do bring up a good point - I haven't tried Vista, and probably won't, so I'll admit there's probably stuff I'm missing.)