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.
Thread beginning with comment 279811
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
So can we...
by Adam S on Mon 22nd Oct 2007 14:01 UTC
Adam S
Member since:
2005-04-01

So, can we admit then, finally, truthfully, and in an unbiased form, that Windows itself is done?

Windows - at we know it today - is in its downswing. Yes, it's everywhere, and it's the basis for virtually every corporate environment. But the word is out. Any major shop who isn't evaluating alternatives is woefully delinquent. If Microsoft has any chance of surviving in this arena for more than the next decade or so, they need a dramatic change.

What Thom is proposing here, essentially, is scrapping Windows as a whole. Save only the kernel - nay, a subset of a fraction of the kernel - and rebuild a new OS atop.

I welcome this move. Windows is fundamentally used-up. The licensing is draconian. The software is a constant battle for most users. I should know, I support hundreds of them. They don't work on Windows - they work in spite of it.

So I agree that a move like this would be a great strategic move for Microsoft if they want to stay relevant in the long run in this corner of the market.

Reply Score: 2

RE: So can we...
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 22nd Oct 2007 14:41 in reply to "So can we..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

So, can we admit then, finally, truthfully, and in an unbiased form, that Windows itself is done?


Windows Vista is Microsoft's OS9. It's done, it's used used up, there's no more stretch in the elastics, as we Dutch say. It's time to move on, and make a viable plan for the future - and I don't see how Microsoft can maintain its relevancy by building atop Vista.

Edited 2007-10-22 14:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: So can we...
by Kroc on Mon 22nd Oct 2007 15:55 in reply to "RE: So can we..."
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

I thought Vista was more like OSX.0. Slow, incompatible, horribly inadequate and it'll be five revisions later before it's up to scratch.

The problem with Vista is that if MS move to a new OS and virtualise Vista, Vista will end up being heavier than the new OS, what a drag that will be. It would have been far, far better if MS had virtualised XP inside of Vista and dropped all backcompat in the name of a cleaner, leaner stack on top of the Kernel.

Vista was mismanaged. I don't doubt the programmers themselves because Microsoft produce good, solid products on every front except for consumer Windows releases!

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: So can we...
by joshv on Mon 22nd Oct 2007 21:47 in reply to "RE: So can we..."
joshv Member since:
2006-03-18

"Windows Vista is Microsoft's OS9. It's done, it's used used up, there's no more stretch in the elastics, as we Dutch say. It's time to move on, and make a viable plan for the future - and I don't see how Microsoft can maintain its relevancy by building atop Vista."

Yes, exactly like OS9 - a 64-bit, preemptive multitasking, hardware graphics accelerated OS9 with virtual memory.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE: So can we...
by butters on Mon 22nd Oct 2007 16:23 in reply to "So can we..."
butters Member since:
2005-07-08

It truly feels like the end of an era. Not just for software systems, but for a whole corporate American mindset on how to manage large projects of great economic and social import. You can almost feel the "whoosh" of the deflating ideology as its symbolic champions knowingly head for the exits and their dutiful sidekicks blindly rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Meanwhile, the era of centralized control and explicit agreement is gradually giving way to decentralized empowerment and implicit tolerance. The transition will be sticky and bumpy, with winners and losers of all shapes and sizes. The key for stalling giants like Microsoft is to reinvent itself with an eye toward sustainability. Computing is no longer a revolutionary frontier, it's an evolving reality, and Microsoft has to reexamine its priorities with this in mind.

Where did all the frontiers go? We chewed through them all like caterpillars through leaves. Now it is time to contemplate our borderless reality and emerge as butterflies, elegantly endowed with a common vision for a sustainable future. Hopefully our cocoons won't become our graves.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: So can we...
by stestagg on Tue 23rd Oct 2007 15:47 in reply to "RE: So can we..."
stestagg Member since:
2006-06-03

The transition will be sticky and bumpy, with winners and losers of all shapes and sizes.

I'm gonna be a winner of IT2.0 you just wait!

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: So can we...
by polaris20 on Mon 22nd Oct 2007 19:33 in reply to "So can we..."
polaris20 Member since:
2005-07-06

Try as some might to look to alternatives to Windows, in many cases it just won't work, at least not without the help of virtualization running Windows for about 3 different critical apps in our case.

Reply Parent Score: 1