Home > Windows > Microsoft Shows Off New Vista Features Microsoft Shows Off New Vista Features Eugenia Loli 2005-10-18 Windows 80 Comments In its first update to a new community-based preview program, Microsoft is showing off a number of new features for Windows Vista, including efforts to improve the web browser and make the operating system more resilient. About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 80 Comments 2005-10-18 6:29 pm Anonymous Vista is looking pretty impressive lately. I wonder whether Apple will manage to out-do them with OS X 10.5. What is the Linux camp offering in terms of desktop use? Is it anywhere close to Vista/OS X a year from now? 2005-10-18 6:37 pm AdamW Judging by your username and bio, I’m sure you’ll listen calmly to any responses you get to that question. (barely concealed laughter) 2005-10-18 6:44 pm Anonymous I’m genuinely curious for genuine answers. I don’t mean the typical “OMG MS SUX0RZ LUNIX WILL R0X0R IT” Linux-kiddie drivel, but a real, down-to-earth comparison of what Linux will be able to offer compared to Vista and OS X. 2005-10-18 6:49 pm Anonymous You are not looking for Linux kiddie drivel yet you spew Microsoft cheerleader kiddie drivel. 2005-10-18 6:54 pm Anonymous I do? Look again, but be sure to remove the Penguin Brand cellophane from over your monitor. It’s distorting what you see. 2005-10-18 6:57 pm andrewg Of course the guy with ‘Linux is poo’ as a username wants people to think he is level headed and pragmatic. A GNU/Linux distribution may offer you a little more security or peace of mind even if it is because of obscurity. Maybe a little more flexibility, maybe a little more choice, the rare application that doesn’t run on Windows. Probably be about as stable. But you won’t be able to use MS Office, Macromedia Studio, Adobe CS or many other applications. And don’t forget games. You won’t be able to play any of the latest games. Oh yes you wont have to run anti-virus and pay for subscriptions. For the most part GNU/Linux with Gnome or KDE is similar to Windows. It can do the things Windows can. To use the tired car analogy. Its like a BMW and a Mercedes. They both do the same things. It SHOULD just come down to preference and price. But usually people are so much like sheep. They must have their windows even if they just send email, just like they must have their Outlook 2005-10-19 12:13 pm Anonymous A GNU/Linux distribution may offer you a little more security or peace of mind even if it is because of obscurity. Yep, you’re so right GNU/Linux is offering security through obscurity. I mean, it’s the 21st century, they really should release the code under an open license, like MS will do it with Vista and like other versions of Windows which have alwasy been available under the GNU/GPL license… oh, I’m sorry it’s the other way around ;-P 2005-10-19 4:37 pm andrewg Had to chuckle a bit at your comment. I do think that an uptodate GNU/Linux is technically more secure than Windows XP SP2 with updates, but it would still be vulnerable to buffer overflow attacks etc, etc. GNU/Linux is likely not perfectly secure. The obscurity part comes in because people trying to do malicious things are not targetting Linux users right now because there is no need to. They have 90% of the market using Windows and unlike the majority of current Linux users most of them are not at all tech savvy. 2005-10-18 7:43 pm roguelazer Linux will be able to offer its traditional strengths- choice, security, and configurability. KDE and Gnome will still be around, and still doing their thing. The kernel will be newer and better, and probably somewhere in the vinicity of 2.6.20. KWM and Metacity will probably integrate working compositing subsystems, meaning easy real translucency, transparency, and shadows. X drivers will probably be slightly more stable and faster at compositing, so we’ll probably see some Vista-style gaudy desktop themes. That’s okay. On the usability front, KDE will continue its path of most-options (letting the user set up anything and everything about their DE), whereas Gnome will probably be continuing their path to simplicity. With any luck, they’ll both manage to fit optimizations in there. XFce, Windowmaker, etc. will all be doing things along the same lines, although look for obscenely fancy enlightenment 0.17 usage. Desktop search will continue to expand. Beagle already offers search under Gnome, and I have no doubt that a native KDE front-end will appear eventually. Dashboard-style applets will also probably continue to be popular, with gdesklets and karamba getting more applets and, at least in the case of karamba, getting integrated into the DE. Media players will continue to copy iTunes, Winamp, and Windows Media Player on Linux, although I sincerely hope that more creative solutions (Muine, anyone?) will manage to stay afloat. I see nothing in the way of major networking changes. Linux users seem to do fine with NFS and SAMBA. However, userland filesystems could lead to some interesting things. Back when I used to use FTPFS, it was nice to be able to just interact with remote drives as though they were local. OS X (and to a lesser extent Windows) can do this already, and I think FUSE will bring this right into the Linux kernel. Nice. Linux already has some of what Vista will bring. Things like transparency and prettyness are very emphasized, but they’re not key to the system. Security and document/file management appear to be the major pushes with Vista. Here’s an interesting note, though. The path bar in explorer.exe has, as many of you know, been changed to a set of path buttons just like the gtk file save box and the Nautilus browser view. I wonder whether the MS guys or the GTK guys had that idea first? So that’s my down-to-earth prediction of the Linux desktop next year. Much the same, but slightly prettier and more functional. Lots of ideas borrowed from Windows and OS X, but some original ones too. Themes allowing people who like Vista’s “glass” experience to use it on Linux (I wonder how long before somebody does this in e-0.17? It would be easy…). Business as usual. 2005-10-18 8:11 pm Night Here’s an interesting note, though. The path bar in explorer.exe has, as many of you know, been changed to a set of path buttons just like the gtk file save box and the Nautilus browser view. I wonder whether the MS guys or the GTK guys had that idea first? Maybe they both stole it from Nextstep or CDE. 2005-10-18 10:47 pm Anonymous Thanks for the down-to-Earth answer. I’ll have to try a modern Linux distro again in about a year. So far I’ve been heavily disappointed by everything. 2005-10-19 7:23 pm Anonymous Awwww did I make the little fanbois upset because they don’t agree with my opinion? I recommend Justin Timberlake – Cry Me a River. 2005-10-18 7:47 pm thabrain All the eye candy and bells and whistles won’t do any good if the OS can’t stay up. Whether you like it or not, Windows does not have a good track record on stability. There’s 20 years of history to prove that. I’ll say this: They’ve decided on a modular design for Windows Vista; that’s a good thing. Time will tell if the changes they’ve made will be effective. Oh, by the way…with the improvements planned for the Linux desktop space, eye candy will be available to those with moderate PC specs. Vista’s eye candy will require specs currently no one has. 2005-10-18 7:53 pm Anonymous Oh please Vista’s eye-candy requires a DX9 graphics card with 64 mb ram. Even low-end cards have that nowadays, and if those to you are “specs currently no one has” I would ask you to please stop living in the past and step into 2005 (or 2006, when Vista actually comes out). 2005-10-18 7:58 pm Anonymous what about the 2GB ddr2 ram and sata2 hard drives? 2005-10-18 11:45 pm sappyvcv Those weren’t actually requirements at all. but hey, believe the FUD if you want. 2005-10-19 5:42 am Aparan Read this: http://news.com.com/FAQ+Getting+a+handle+on+Windows+Vista/2100-1016… So the fact is that Vista ‘will’ require high end Graphics processors/CPU & loads of RAM. 2005-10-18 10:51 pm Anonymous Right, and which version of Windows came out 20 years ago and is still in use today? Thought so. The last three editions of Windows have had absolutely no stability problems whatsoever. I dare say I’ve experienced better stability with Windows XP/Server 2003 as a whole than I have with other Linux distributions. A GNOME applet crash here, a KDE taskbar crash there … I don’t care if the kernel or X haven’t crashed, it still disrupts my work and is still called a crash. Windows has been modular since Windows 2000. Go research “Windows 2000 Embedded”, or “XP Embedded”. As for Vista specs … hahaha … speak for yourself, Mr. Onboard Intel Extreme Graphics. In a year, most everyone will have a 64 MB+ DX9 card in their system. 2005-10-19 10:04 am RawMustard Oh, by the way…with the improvements planned for the Linux desktop space, eye candy will be available to those with moderate PC specs. Vista’s eye candy will require specs currently no one has. Ok that’ll be great, when I get error dialogs about my sound device being used by something else, they look cool, coz they’ll be transparent 2005-10-19 10:43 am proforma >All the eye candy and bells and whistles won’t do >any good if the OS can’t stay up. Whether you like >it or not, Windows does not have a good track record >on stability. There’s 20 years of history to prove >that. Welcome to 1995. This is an exact example why I think a ton of Linux users are out of date and have a ton of misinformation either on purpose or because they are so clueless. They simply don’t understand that this is the 21st Century and we have moved on from MSDOS and Windows 95. >Oh, by the way…with the improvements planned for >the Linux desktop space, eye candy will be available >to those with moderate PC specs. Vista’s eye candy >will require specs currently no one has. Again, this is totally incorrect and really a lot of mis-information going on out there. You can use this eye candy with lower end 3D cards today. I don’t mind Linux itself, it’s just the clueless folks who have no idea what Microsoft is all about, they are still living in the past and have no idea what Microsoft is doing and if it is better than what they have they still say it sucks and it has the BSOD. Its really sad to see people so clueless out there. I am not saying Microsoft is the utlimate, but dude if you are going to learn to say something at least be up to date and know exactly what is going on with the latest software technologies. There is nothing more anoying to see someone post with no clue about what they are saying. Next some linux zealot will say that Vista is only running 16-bit code. No joke! This is how sad the linux community has become. 2005-10-19 12:39 am Anonymous It is true that Win95/98/Me were terrible with crashes and lockups but I can’t say I’ve had the same experience with 2000 and XP. If you run on a stable and proven hardware platform (a.k.a. not enthusiast hardware but an Intel motherboard and a high quality PSU) with certified drivers and don’t download viruses / spyware, you will not experience crashes. Same principle with cars. You will probably have less quality problems if you buy a BMW compared to a Kia. I use Windows XP, Server 2000/2003, and FreeBSD daily and find them all to be extremely stable in both a home and business environment. 2005-10-19 11:26 am jessta What is the Linux camp offering in terms of desktop use? Freedom. Is it anywhere close to Vista/OS X a year from now? It’s far far ahead. 2005-10-18 6:31 pm Anonymous This article doesn’t mention it, but apparently this build also features the new volume control. This is supposed to let you adjust the volume of each app individually, so you can do things like watch a DVD and mute all the other sounds for example. Pretty cool idea, if they implemented it correctly. 2005-10-18 9:06 pm segedunum This is supposed to let you adjust the volume of each app individually, so you can do things like watch a DVD and mute all the other sounds for example. The mind boggles at the support calls on this. I think it’s a crap idea to be honest. You only have one set of speakers on a PC, and the vast majority of people use the volume control of their own speakers. 2005-10-18 9:18 pm Anonymous “The mind boggles at the support calls on this. I think it’s a crap idea to be honest. You only have one set of speakers on a PC, and the vast majority of people use the volume control of their own speakers.” Uhm it’s a GREAT idea. Being able to control seperate volumes for seperate applications (like in BeOS!) can be very useful. Imagine if you watch a movie while some other app occasionally makes sounds, but because you watch the movie your volume is louder, so the other app becomes TOO loud – you could hear it fine (even despite the movie) if it wasn’t so loud. Crap idea? Don’t be so quick on the offense P 2005-10-19 3:56 am Anonymous What would be a better idea is if the volume would become louder on the applcation you click on. Each appplication has it’s own volume control anyway, why would you want to control it via another more complex third part? We have a volume control, we have each application having a volume control, we have control Center volume control, that three. Why on earth do you need a fourth big brother?. Sorry too complex for average joe and he wants to listen to one thing at a time, not two. 2005-10-19 10:19 am segedunum Uhm it’s a GREAT idea. A great idea – IN BLOCK CAPITALS. Errr, no. Being able to control seperate volumes for seperate applications (like in BeOS!) Well that makes it a fantastic idea, doesn’t it? Imagine if you watch a movie while some other app occasionally makes sounds, but because you watch the movie your volume is louder, so the other app becomes TOO loud – you could hear it fine (even despite the movie) if it wasn’t so loud. When a normal person watches a film they turn all other applications off causing sound interference. You don’t just turn the sound of a particular application up just to get over background noise! That’s just daft. A user now has to coordinate the volume level of each application (the sound card alone was bad enough) they are using along with the volume level of their audio equipment. In some ways it sounds like a good idea (but you will have to configure each application first for it to be of any use to you), but it’s one of those things that is just a recipe for disaster. Crap idea? Don’t be so quick on the offense No, I think I will. 2005-10-18 6:43 pm Anonymous What I see here is that Windows is doing some catching up finally. Not the other way around. 2005-10-18 6:48 pm Anonymous They are showing off playing catch up, more of the same, and allegedly fixing long broken things? Wow, I’m impressed. KDE has long been better than the Windows desktop experience. Ubuntu and other distros are much easier to install and use, more secure, more stable, etc. Microsoft is adding features like transparency that Linux and OS X already have. Will Apple manage to out-do them? They already have years ago, and it still does not look like Microslop will catch up this time. It’s impossible for Microsoft to pass either Linux or OS X, because Microsoft only copies. They do not innovate. 2005-10-18 7:24 pm Anonymous windows has transparency since win 2k. but i don’t see where transparency is adding anything of value. the difference is, on windows it was always fast. but of course you only wanted to troll anyway. 2005-10-19 9:11 am Anonymous are you trolling out that Winblows is hard to install… my grandmother can install XP… lets see her do that with ANY linux distro or BSD… 2005-10-19 12:30 pm Anonymous Parent is a tosser. 2005-10-18 7:17 pm cujo It is markedly annoying to see the first post as an honest question only to be followed by 3 posts questioning if the concern is legitimate because of his/her username. It is almost humorous to see these 3 posters basically bait the original just to see if he/she is legitimately concerned before anyone attempts to answer said question. It is funny because it took 5 posts to accomplish what a single post could on its own. How many MS haters must post on an MS thread, really? It will soon be impossible to count how many “MS never innovates”, “MS”, “Virus” this, “Crashes” that, or “BSOD” posts there will be. If you are one of these posters, or are having the urge to be, SHUT UP AND LEAVE! That said, it is good to see MS putting out what will at least be an interesting OS. There looks to be enough in the way of features and potential improvement to get me to take a look at it. Props. 2005-10-18 7:29 pm andrewg Let me get this straight. You think that a guy who username is ‘Linux is poo’ and who’s bio states that, “Linux is garbage. If you disagree, you are wrong.” isn’t trying to stir with that question? 2005-10-18 7:40 pm cujo That’s not the point. And quite frankly, I don’t care if he’s trying to stir. Fact of the matter is, every time (yes every) someone posts a question that can be construed as inflamatory eight people jump in to bait the poster into making a more explicitly flaming remark. They do this instead of answering the question at hand. If you or anyone else can tell me the noble point of baiting them into getting everyone fired up, by all means I’ll cease and desist, but it is all but flame-wars don’t start with a single post. And let’s be honest, he wasn’t in a Linux article. He was in a Windows one. All the Linux fans bit and “jumped” to the rescue. I’d label his question/comment as less inflamatory as the one that stated that “KDE has been easier to use and blah blah blah for some time blah blah. MS will never win, they don’t inovate” comment by a later poster. 2005-10-18 7:31 pm Anonymous I’m a regular user of both Windows XP Pro and Suse Linux. So far – no matter how objectivily I look at it – I just can’t find any new interesting and/or usefull features in Vista. Pretty much everything is already provided by my currect OS’s of choice. Actually, cynically speaking it’s all just eyecandy and more bloat. 2005-10-18 8:07 pm andrewg How about true resolution independent display. Mac has nothing like it. This is the reason why only newer cards will be able to handle it. They have to be DX10 cards. But most people won’t care because their screens don’t need it. 2005-10-19 12:32 am Anonymous How about true resolution independent display. Mac has nothing like it. This is the reason why only newer cards will be able to handle it. They have to be DX10 cards. But most people won’t care because their screens don’t need it. WRONG! At least get your facts straight before posting. http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/GraphicsImaging/ResolutionI… 2005-10-19 2:59 am sappyvcv From your link: “Important Note: Resolution Independent UI will not be a user level feature in Tiger and won’t be exposed anywhere in the user interface.” Maybe you should read what you post. 2005-10-19 10:33 am proforma “Pretty much everything is already provided by my currect OS’s of choice.” pretty much says everything right there and why I can care less about what you think. You say you use Windows XP and Linux and Linux is your OS of choice and you pretty much admited that you are biased and don’t care for Microsoft and only use XP to run what you can’t on Linux, which already just killed your entire message. Thanks for that 2005-10-18 7:43 pm Anonymous MS is hoping to displace their own XP base onto Vista. The only way this will happen is if they start to make games that are “Vista Only” Otherwise it is just a bootstrap environment for Office. 2005-10-18 7:52 pm Anonymous Did these old geezers fix their broken support for other browsers yet? ( Client side validator code that works on other browsers? ) You know, we’ve got contract requirements that require validation on the client and the server. Dot Net does not meet those contract requirements and therefore should not be used, unless thev’ve fixed it. 2005-10-18 7:53 pm Anonymous I have yet to see an article about Vista that didn’t make me say ‘so what?’. I have yet to see anything to be excited about. Maybe I’m missing something … 2005-10-19 2:00 am Varg Vikernes I have yet _not_ seen a random Vista news with less than 20 smartasses commenting how they’re not exited about it. Go back to your OS of choice and STFU? 2005-10-18 7:55 pm Anonymous Did they rename their old services and move them to new locations? 2005-10-18 8:36 pm Anonymous I will be impressed as soon as MS manage to make an multitasking os that runs smooth on a 7mhz processos with 1meg ram. 2005-10-18 8:49 pm Anonymous I will be impressed as soon as MS manage to make an multitasking os that runs smooth on a 7mhz processos with 1meg ram. Who the hell uses a 7mhz processor with 1meg ram for desktop computing? 2005-10-18 9:19 pm Anonymous I will be impressed as soon as MS manage to make an multitasking os that runs smooth on a 7mhz processos with 1meg ram. Who the hell uses a 7mhz processor with 1meg ram for desktop computing? I think, its Amiga 500 (with expansion 512k RAM), true multitasking Only problem is, only 4096 colors, too low resolution, only 1 theme GUI, but multitasking is best! Better than Linux, OS X, WinXP etc… Not sure why, but i think, OS GUI based on chip/ROM or so… 2005-10-18 9:30 pm Anonymous WinCE? 2005-10-18 8:59 pm Anonymous It is only to be expected that this news item will get sarcastic responses from Linux dorks about how Windows is finally starting to catch up to Linux. The truth is that as a desktop environment Windows has been more usable than Linux since 1995. Things just work. One example out of many: note how much easier it is for the typical user to add or remove fonts in Windows than any Linux desktop environment. In this respect, as in many others, Linux basically takes a dive face first into a pile of crap. Let’s talk about stability, another favorite topic of Linux dorks. If Linux is so freaking stable, why is it so easy to get a frozen browser window after surfing the Internet for just half an hour, regardless of distribution, browser software, or hardware configuration? If it’s due to beta status of the software, why has it remained in this craptastic state for only the last ten years? Why is it that the same machine running Windows does not exhibit the same weakness? Open Office is in its second version now. Why does the menu still look like crap? Sure, I can change the font using desktop preference tools, but why do I have to? Why can it not look good out of the box like those “inferior” Windows office apps? Face it. 90% of Linux is unmitigated crap. Embraced by a few people who wallow in crap. That’s the bottom line. 2005-10-18 9:26 pm mkools You are laughable. Open Internet Explorer and enter a non-existent ftp server, try to open ftp:/127.0.0.1:26 for example, now try to close Internet Explorer. You can’t, it freezes and the only way to kill it is using task manager. I believe that bug is in there for about 15 years right now with the only difference that I can kill iexplore.exe under NT – 2000 – XP where I used to get a blue screen of dead within 95-98-ME. You were saying something about frozen browsers? I never have that problem within GNOME. Adding fonts under linux? It’s easier! I can do it with one single command! About Open Office, I don’t like to pay 900 bucks for a new office version just because of a new installer and some more eyecandy in the menubars and no extra functionality at all. If you like to do that and have money enough be my guest. 2005-10-19 1:51 pm Anonymous I just entered that FTP address into IE6 in W2K and guess what, it didn’t crash or freeze at all. Maybe you are laughable because your computer is crap. 2005-10-18 10:51 pm dylansmrjones Actually it doesn’t ‘just work’. Neither does the linux desktop or the mac desktop. They all have certain shortcomings. A few days ago I posted links to some of my screenshots showing that windows couldn’t handle scaling properly with customized DPI settings, even for it’s own built-in dialogues. Gnome works fine with scaling. However Gnome has some other drawbacks. Nautilus for one – it’s not exactly too stable. Windows isn’t as jerky in it’s movement as Gnome is. But both desktops fails in regard to drag’n’drop to printers. So does Mac OS X. But they all have certain areas where they really rule. Personally I like the speed of Windows 2003 Server (can’t mention that one to often). And I like the good drag’n’drop support in Gnome. And the swiftness of the menues. Much better than in Win2K3 Server. It’s going to be interesting what Vista can give, that I need. *Must be patient – must be patient* 2005-10-19 1:10 am dylansmrjones *LOL* .. modded down. Wonder why. 2005-10-19 9:26 am bn-7bc Poor Mass. thay have to be stupid to chamge to Limiks and Open Office and so is a cuple of citys in germany. Seriosly du tou reaky think they wold change if you where right about linux? Granted these places hve IT departments to help users when ther is a problem and in an office you don’t hav to worry about digicams, webcams etc. Linux mey have a way to go before it’s ok to yuse as the first desktop a user ever uses at home, but he more people that gets linx at work, the more people start getting curios and wants to try it at home. There are also linux distros tha ar built specialy to make trasistiom from windows easy. As for web browser lockups I’ve had ONE it the last month and I do a lot of browsing (Firefox 1.5b2 had no problem with B1 at all). Ok I’ll have to say that Open office isn’t perfect, it cold be a lot faster but for some reson the devs built everything nto one big binary (seems like yhis have changer in 2.0 rc) Ps: I respect people that mod me down but pleace drop a comment and tel me why so I can correct/ do better next time 2005-10-18 10:44 pm ZaNkY In my experience, Windows and Linux (with a DesktopEenvironment/WindowManager) are about equal in functioanality. Windows however crashes more often (IN MY EXPERIENCE), and I have NEVER seen ANY spyware on the many Linux/Unix distros I’ve used. Microsoft SEEMS to be making a step in the right direction, and they should be applauded for that, but there are so many OTHER things they should be doing instead. Personally, I like the nice “Aero” windowy thing (I mean WOW! now I can tilt my window sideways! Isn;t that awesome! ::sigh::). But if I had to choose between the interface, and a Network security overhaul, guess which one I’d use? (The network overhaul if you didn’t get my drift). As far as I’m concerned, There is still a lot of Win3.1 source code floating around in Vista (I may be wrong, but i read someplace that most of the core APIs are virtually unchanged from the beginings of Windows, correct me if I’m wrong) What my point is: There is no point in having this religious Linux Vs Windows debate, Abandon both and write your own OS like I’m doing! lol I’m kidding on abandoning both, but there is no need to criticize either side for their faults (yes they both have faults). I’m writing my own OS, so maybe one day I’ll come out on top of this debate –ZaNkY 2005-10-18 10:53 pm dylansmrjones Could you give us more details about your OS? 2005-10-18 11:50 pm sappyvcv The network stack is getting an overhaul actually They can do multiple things at once ya know 2005-10-19 5:58 am Aparan No, it is said that the total structure of the OS has been reworked. This would give a detailed insight – http://www.babsonfreepress.com/media/paper463/news/2005/09/29/Busin… That points to some better work. 2005-10-18 11:17 pm ZaNkY Well, I’m still in the designing stage, But I plan to code the entire thing in Assembly. Both Windows and Linux are coded mostly in C++ (and almost any other OS for that matter). C++ is a good language, but doesn’t match up to Assembly in terms of speeds and efficiency (usually). I want to: • Design and build a brand new File System • Scrap the idea of a kernel, and use multiple diferent kernel-like “programs” that controll the computer, but are controlled by a master super-kernel that has no real executing abilities of it’s own (a security minded idea more than inovation in architecture) • A TRUE 3D environment to work in that is adaptable to the user’s needs (easy to maneuver around with, easily turned off, custumizable plugins and widgets….) • Security features built in that are meticoulously hard to disable, yet won’t bother the user at all • Ability to modify the OS like you would compile a linux kernel I’m heading in the direction of writing my OS as a 64-bit OS, but I’m not decided yet. Those are the main points, but again, I’m still designing how things will be in the end. I should start coding sometime within this month and prolly won’t be finished with a stable 1.0 version till next year (if even at that lol). I recognize that it’s a HUGE project, but I’m still gonna try. That way I can say that even though I whined about a certain OS not being great, I did something about it to make a great OS –ZaNkY 2005-10-18 11:28 pm abraxas Both Windows and Linux are coded mostly in C++ I hate to break it to you but Linux is NOT coded in C++. The Linux kernel is coded in plain old C. Scrap the idea of a kernel, and use multiple diferent kernel-like “programs” that controll the computer, but are controlled by a master super-kernel that has no real executing abilities of it’s own (a security minded idea more than inovation in architecture) That sounds a lot like a microkernel to me. 2005-10-18 11:49 pm ZaNkY Did I say C++ for Linux? Oops lol. Well I meant C in general, I think Windows Vista migh be in C++ .net or some other C++ derivative. I seriously did mean C, but that doesn’t change much. Although C has the ability to write some asm code (and is as such faster than C++), it still cannot compete speedwise with pure assembly as far as I’m concerned. Thank you for the correction Sure you could say it’s similar to a microkernel, but I haven’t yet decided exactly how to implement it. I want to be innovative in most aspects of OS design, and I’m still trying to think of how to write a kernel that is not easily suseptable to being tricked into doing something mallicious, or be completely changed without the user’s knowledge (and consent), while remaining an easy to modify OS (by the user). If you have any suggestions, I would greatly appreciate them –ZaNkY 2005-10-18 11:52 pm sappyvcv Windows is a combination of assembly (used a lot in the kernel), C and C++. 2005-10-19 12:06 am ZaNkY It is true that windows has some assembly code in the kernel, but that’s because every major OS that really desires to interacts with its users need some Assembly code here and there in the kernel. But a good majority is witen in a C like language. It’s good to know that they’re rewirting the network stack, I just hope they can do it right this time. I know that microsoft said that they were making XP tougher networkwise, and I can’t really say I saw that happening. Windows firewall comming off by default without Service pack being a PRIME example. Not that the current Networking is bad (ie crap), it just could use a LOT of fixes and improvements I hope Vista turns out better security wise than previous experience dictates (and price too ) 2005-10-19 9:06 am Anonymous C isn’t faster than C++ due to the ability to imbeed assembly though non-standard extensions to the C standard. Both C and C++ (and any other compiled code) can have assembly “imbeded” in them through the linker (Yeah I know that is somewhat misleading but I’m rushing). As for your ideas related to the kernel you may be interesting in microkernels (QNX, Mach, L3/L4) and exokernels. However I would say the best mechanism is the combination of a monolithic and microkernel as Windows does it or a monolithic kernel with loadable modules as Linux does it. (Ohhh and on a side note no kernel design will protect from programmer error which is what causes most problems. That’s a job for intelligent compilers and intelligent programmers ) 2005-10-19 12:00 am Anonymous [i]Well, I’m still in the designing stage, But I plan to code the entire thing in Assembly. Both Windows and Linux are coded mostly in C++ (and almost any other OS for that matter). C++ is a good language, but doesn’t match up to Assembly in terms of speeds and efficiency (usually). </í> If simple a program, sure Assembly is fastest ever and smallest size, but not for heavy program or heavy OS. So use C/C++, its faster and more stable (but large size) than asm, cuz optimized, cache memory, less error etc etc. And alot save time if work with C/C++! Even possible write some asm on it. For you, its better take C, not C++ which is a bit slow and too complex. 2005-10-19 2:04 am Varg Vikernes IIRC “your” kernel (as you described it) works on the same principle as Hurd used to. And it took them 15 years to get a programming running under it. Good luck! 2005-10-19 3:01 am Anonymous Thats freaking awesome. Make your own OS. Thats empowerment. You go zanky. 2005-10-18 11:51 pm Anonymous That must be a joke. Even Vista Build 5232 kept freezing on me so often that I don’t waste my time on it anymore. Thank God there are stable and usable OSs like Linux who actually contribute to your productivity rather than enslaving you with unpaid and frustrating testing. 2005-10-19 12:07 am Anonymous http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/09/07/vista_hardware_reqs/ With specs like that, the price of a WinPC will go way up. When the price of a compliment good rises, the demand for that good’s compliment declines. That means that less people will buy Windows. Will more people use linux, or will more people buy Mac’s? 2005-10-19 12:33 am ZaNkY Thats one thing that I’ve been thinking for a LOOOONG time (bout 2 years, since i first heard bout longhorn and Trusted Computing crap) I think that the Linux “camp” is gearing up for an assult (LIKE STAR WARS!! woot). If the different distros work together they can start to launch a commercial of sorts Linux. What I mean is having a linux CD on the shelves of EVERY major computer stores, right next to Windows Vista. 300$ (an estimated guess) for an OS that will force you to upgrade to a beastly computer (see bellow)? Or 5$ (for CD printing and packaging costs) for a Linux Distro that has improved most of it’s quirks and produced a UNIFIED LINUX, not some other distro that can stand on its own like Debian, Red Hat, Slackware, Gentoo……………………………………. The NUMBER 1 thing that scares me about Vista is the requirements. I just bought a BRAND NEW computer about 3 months ago, FX-57, 2 gigs of Ram, 200 Gig SATA drive, 7800 GTX…… The scary part? My computer BARELY meets the hardware requirements (aka minimum requirements)! And it took me YEARS of saving up to get my computer. Imagine for the rest of the world? 4000+$ for the new shiny Vista! or 5$ (or free if downloaded) + my current computer? Hardware reqs: http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/09/07/vista_hardware_reqs/ Which shall i use…..hmmm thats a hard decision…… 2005-10-19 12:56 am Anonymous I still wait to have 900 Euros of bug in my linux-box. running since almost 2 years with a debian based machine using, internet, OOO (open office), and mailing, or reading movies, handling mp3, burning cds ,sharing all this with 2 childs (14 year old ), with no problem, no virus just apt-get dist-upgrade!! Meanwile in the same machine a partition with windows installed just for games and few tools not found in Linux (ie graphics) has already be reinstalled 5 or 6 time!!! (someone can explain why win folder become so fat from 1 to 2 go ?) just with so few usability? and no links from outside ?(I may not forget antiviruses, antipubs, anti….) With vista bill is doing the next step of of a known story : you will see !!! For me I don’t want to see I want it work, that’s it! He most probably forgot (if he knew that once) what is an OS, cause at the bottom line Windows is just that nothing more and in the matter Linux or apple don’t have lessons to receive from Mr Gate! And of course I don’t here speak about creativity, it seems that insults are forbiden here. 2005-10-19 5:16 am nii_ This may indeed bring it up to speeds with the likes of the latest GNU/Linux releases, such FC4 (Fedora Core 4) and the latest Ubuntu etc. These latest GNU/Linux distros are easily more user friendly. But its yet to be shown whether Windows Vista will be able to catch up to GNU/Linux for security and stability. But by that time Windows Vista is out, FC5 will be out and again linux will still be in the lead. The only thing I can think of now where GNU/Linux is behind is loading speeds of applications. 2005-10-19 5:36 am Anonymous Windows loads applications up faster because of prefeching, it’s even done on WMP which is pointless. The thing with Linux apps is they load at there own speed, and not helped by prefech or put in memory always. 2005-10-19 5:47 am Anonymous Vista is boring so far. It’s just like they’re doing a service pack to Windows Server 2003. Don’t get me wrong I like server 2003, it has never crashed on me once. It’s just that I’ve been using it for a long time and I want something different. Microsoft has been promising since 2001 that we would be getting a “Windows Longhorn” that was completely re-written and brand new from the ground up. Instead we’re getting a Vista, which is a shiny new theme and some DRM features bolted onto Windows Server 2003, which means we’re getting yet-another-slight-mostly-cosmetic-update to Windows NT. That’s why we’re not impressed. I’m more interested in what Apple hasn’t said about Leopard than anything MS has said about Longhorn or Vista. Everything out of Gates and Ballmers mouths between 2001 – 2004 was a complete lie. How much longer are you going to let MS sell you on products that don’t and may never exist? 2005-10-19 6:23 am Anonymous These new Vista features are one big yawn! If it hadn’t been for the new graphical-composer-GUI thing this should not even deserve a separate product name. I’ve got a feeling from statements a yera or so ago, that Vista would be some sort of a clean break (.NET based, advanced fs, etc. – I don’t even remember the marktroid talk anymore). But this is just the good old NT getting a new paintjob once more!!! 2005-10-19 6:50 am Anonymous Vista is going the way of Linux Modulization of everything Hence Vista x 20 different versions Linux dependency hell gnome/kde ‘feel’ like shakey Windows 98 e17 CVS looks awesome 2D Linux apps need to catch up Vista will be worth the wait 2005-10-19 7:18 am Anonymous Thats a very mish mash bunch of comments there ,Linux DE is well ahead of XP and free. Worth the wait!, yer at what price? The thing with Linux is every version is not cut down, Vista will offer cut down versions of the same product masked as choice. 2005-10-19 7:11 am Anonymous What would be a better idea is if the volume would become louder on the applcation you click on. That’s a great idea – something like that was implemented in the BeOS MediaPlayer – although BeOS had a panel to control volume of all aplications, the Media Player also had an option to halve the volume when not active. In other words, no need to complicate the OS any further, it can be just implemented on the app level. 2005-10-19 8:31 am Anonymous Myths: 1. Vista will need a supercomputer to run Vista runs just fine on my year old notebook with 64MB Radeon. Sure there’s stability issues, but that’s the result of moving to a userspace .NET based driver that isn’t complete yet. The published specs are for an ideal system, and probably similar to the one used at PDC2005 where everything starts instantly. Start saving… 2. Vista runs slower than XP The new graphics pipeline of performing GDI rendering in software then sending it directly to VRAM for texture processing is actually faster than accelerated 2D GDI+, and that’s on the same 64MB Direct X 9 graphics card above. Computers with smaller amounts of VRAM will switch down into Aero without the glass effects, and non DX 9 cards can run in a classic XP style. However, the performance difference on a DX 9 card by switching to “Classic” is non-existent. 3. They’re not fixing security The network stack is being rewritten (perhaps they’ll stop using that old stack nicked from BSD). There is user account protection ALA Mac OS X / Linux. Internet Explorer 7 runs in a severely limited mode that can only write to its temp and cookie directory. 4. It’ll still be as unstable as XP The video and sound stacks are being moved to userspace running in managed .NET – kind of like X.Org. In any case, it’s still more stable than Linux for the majority of users (where it counts). Ubuntu doesn’t even boot on most of the notebooks I own. 5. They’re just copying Mac OS X and X.Org Last time I checked, X.Org is playing catch up with Mac OS X. Just because MS is implementing a 3D UI, does not mean it’s catching up with Mac OS X. There’s a big difference. OS X uses PDF to render 2D GUIs using the 3D graphics pipeline. X.Org will probably use Cairo to do the same in Xgl. Microsoft’s approach is to develop XAML to allow 3D GUIs to be rendered using the 3D graphics pipeline. It’s a one letter difference with big implications. Cairo, GTK2 and QT4 just don’t come close, so I don’t see how Linux is a valid comparison in the first place. 6. I’m a Microsoft fanboy I use both Windows and Linux depending on the task I’m trying to do. Desktop = Windows, Servers = Linux. Let’s face it, Linux has not had the millions of pounds of R&D money put into psychological HCI research that Windows and OSX have had. Maybe the Novell stuff will change that. I hope it does. Really.