Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 30th May 2008 14:49 UTC
Windows We have learnt quite a lot about Windows 7 this week, and one of the things was that Windows 7 would not get a new kernel. The call for a new kernel has been made a few times on the internet, but anyone with a bit more insight into Windows' kernel knows that there is absolutely no need to write a new kernel for Windows - the problems with Windows lie in userland, not kernelland. While the authenticity of the Shipping Seven blog is not undisputed, the blogger makes some very excellent points regarding the kernel matter.
Thread beginning with comment 316248
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Comment by FunkyELF
by pandronic on Fri 30th May 2008 16:41 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by FunkyELF"
pandronic
Member since:
2006-05-18

It seems that Windows bashing is quite popular here and sadly just for the sake of it.

I, too, haven't had XP BSOD on me, although I take care of about 10-15 systems (those at work, and some of a few friends and family) except a couple of times when dealing with faulty hardware.

To the people that bash Windows: please tell me of an OS as good as Windows, with as many mature applications as Windows (goodbye Linux) and which runs on 300$ hardware (goodbye Mac OS X).

I'm not saying it's perfect. I'm saying it has its merits but you guys fail to see them out of some reason that only you can understand.

Reply Parent Score: 7

v RE[5]: Comment by FunkyELF
by Stephen! on Fri 30th May 2008 16:52 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by FunkyELF"
RE[6]: Comment by FunkyELF
by rockwell on Fri 30th May 2008 17:36 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by FunkyELF"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

Ooh, way to nail him on that one. Except that everybody connects the term "Linux" with "any operating system that runs on the Linux kernel." Everybody that doesn't live in their parent's basement, anyway.

Edited 2008-05-30 17:47 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by FunkyELF
by gonzo on Fri 30th May 2008 18:54 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by FunkyELF"
gonzo Member since:
2005-11-10

Linux is a kernel, not an OS...

Smart ass, aren't you?

Edited 2008-05-30 18:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[5]: Comment by FunkyELF
by helf on Fri 30th May 2008 18:48 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by FunkyELF"
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

I've had several XP machines here, at work, BSOD on me. But it has always been hardware issues. Such as bad memory or hard drives.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: Comment by FunkyELF
by jabbotts on Fri 30th May 2008 19:34 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by FunkyELF"
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

So you complain about those who bash Windows by bashing Linux based OS.. nice.. that's how to get your point across

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by FunkyELF
by systyrant on Fri 30th May 2008 22:51 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by FunkyELF"
systyrant Member since:
2007-01-18

I haven't seen a blue screen of death in many many years. So I'm with everybody else on this one. Windows is a whole lot better than it use to be.

To me not using Microsoft products is more of a political/religious thing. I just simply don't like the company or the way it conducts business.

Linux, Unix, BSD, and the MacOS X are all equal to Windows IMO. I'd say the Windows platform wins in application support, but that doesn't, by itself, make it a good OS or platform. Just the most widely used and supported.

Macs are damn expensive, but then again Windows Vista is, imo, way overpriced too. I like Apple, but I truly believe given the opportunity they would be just as "evil" as Microsoft.

People can say what they want, but at the end of the day the majority of people are still going to be using Windows. Linux might be making inroads in the server and desktop market, but it'll probably be awhile before they "take over". On the plus side it's highly unlikely that the Mac platform will ever become the dominate platform which I think suites Steve Jobs.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: Comment by FunkyELF
by tweakedenigma on Sat 31st May 2008 14:25 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by FunkyELF"
tweakedenigma Member since:
2006-12-27

Im gonna challenge you on that one. I would argue that Linux has near that number of mature apps that Windows does. I would suggest that like many you except that they don't exist because they don't share a name with what you are presently used too. Also Windows Vista is not capable of running (properly) on 300 dollar hardware.

For the record this is not Windows bashing. I have no issues with Windows or the people who use it.

Reply Parent Score: 2