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.
E-mail Print r 4   · Read More · 99 Comment(s)
Thread beginning with comment 316258
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Blogger Excellent Points? Not so much.
by RGCook on Fri 30th May 2008 17:08 UTC
Member since:

My take aways:

1. Modern Windows consist of a functionally mininal "winmin" kernel that is some of the best code MS has.

2. To produce an OS for a particular purpose, the kernel is simply adorned with a suitable selection of feature components that can be attached via XML.

3. Windows is actually a highly modular and "componentized" OS.

From this, I conclude from experience with Vista:

1. The choice of components that make up Vista was very poor in many respects. The components add or detract from previous functionality, are poorly coded and/or designed and perform very poorly.

I therefore recommend the following to MS:

Rethink the component selection that goes into Windows 7 for the categorical uses, desktop, server, mobil, etc.

Allow the system to respond to users needs for new functionality. That is, default installs provide 90% of the users with 90% of the functionality for that particular use/platform. Let the so-called 10%'ers to leverage the cited XML routine so that the system can dynamically add/enable needed components and features.

Following the above logic, do away with the various flavors of windows (i.e, standard, premium, ultimate, et. al.) and just give us one, dynamically adaptable Windows that serves MY needs. Call this new radical OS, Windows.

Finally, clean up the design and performance of the components we use most. The ones that cause Vista to get such a bad rap. You are already doing this, I can see, as gaming performance now approximates Windows circa 2001. That's a good step but we want better performance, not to be simply releived when we par on decade old performance metrics.

Reply Score: 4

Adam S Member since:

do away with the various flavors of windows [...] and just give us one, dynamically adaptable Windows that serves MY needs. Call this new radical OS, Windows.

Yeah right. And lose one of the most central ways to gouge their customers for more $? Come on. Windows servers, in their standard editions, can barely take advantage of most modern hardware until you drop another $1500-$3000 dollars.

Reply Parent Score: 1