 |
 |
| ActiveWin | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise | VBA in Excel | Users Online: 0 |
|
|
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Network |
|
ActiveMac |
|
ActiveWin |
|
ActiveXbox |
|
DirectX |
|
Downloads |
|
FAQs |
|
Interviews |
|
MS Games & Hardware |
|
Reviews |
|
Rocky Bytes |
|
Support Center |
|
TopTechTips |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows Server 2003 |
|
Windows Vista |
|
Windows XP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
Apple/Mac |
|
Xbox/Xbox 360 |
|
News Search |
|
XML/RSS Newsfeeds |
|
Pocket PC Site |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows Vista |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows Server 2003 |
|
Windows XP |
|
Windows 7 |
|
Windows 8 |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox 360 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Xbox/Games |
|
Fable 2 |
|
|
|
Applications |
|
Windows Server 2008 R2 |
|
Windows 7 |
|
Adobe CS5 Master Collection |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Microsoft Express Mouse |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Interviews |
|
Mike Swanson |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Advertise |
|
Affiliates |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
 |
Microsoft maps out migration from Windows | |
|
||
| Time: 12:58 EST/17:58 GMT | News Source: SD Times | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
David Worthington: At the risk of undercutting one of its core product lines, Microsoft is carefully conceptualizing a way to move millions of users away from the existing Windows codebase and onto Midori, a legacy-free operating system that it is currently incubating in its skunk works.
|
||
|
Read Only Comments Return to News |
Displaying Comments 1 through 11 of 11 |
This is an archived static copy of ActiveWin.com. |
| #1 By 7754 (206.169.247.2) at Thursday, July 31, 2008 02:33:29 PM |
|
This is great insight, if true (it does seem to square with previous comments from the core Windows team and others). It seems like a long, long slog to a mature OS, though, by throwing out everything. I'm not sure how much they really need to throw out for their ideal approach to parallelism... it seems that Win32 is due for retirement, but the NT kernel is a very solid foundation. As we saw with iterations of NT, even if the kernel is solid, it takes some time before everything matures and stabilizes around it. Maybe the approaches in Midori would mitigate that, but... I think it would still take quite awhile to have a mature OS.
I wonder if Dave Cutler is involved. |
| #2 By 1896 (74.166.235.69) at Thursday, July 31, 2008 04:46:08 PM |
|
Even if this "Midori" project will become an OS instead of being split in different other projects, like it happened to "Cairo", we are looking at least at 2014/2015.
If everything goes as planned we will have:Windows 7 early 2010, Windows 8 early 2013; add the fact MS needs resources to develop Office, Server OSes, SQL etc. etc. I do not see something so radically different to be ready earlier... although I would love to be proven wrong. This post was edited by Fritzly on Thursday, July 31, 2008 at 16:47. |
| #3 By 82766 (202.154.80.82) at Thursday, July 31, 2008 05:20:30 PM |
|
Damned if they do... cries about compatilibity, new app's, new driver's blah blah blah
Damned if they don't... cries about Windows being bloated, slow, same old stuff, blah blah blah It just shocking really... personally, I think they should do it :) |
| #4 By 143 (216.205.223.146) at Thursday, July 31, 2008 10:31:19 PM |
| If it's better than XP I think people wouldn't bark too much. |
| #5 By 133206 (80.42.155.247) at Friday, August 01, 2008 01:23:00 AM |
|
Interesting ..... but given Microsofts history & struggling ability when it comes to developing stable and solid OS platforms, this is likely to require external assistance, could we be seeing the advent of a "Microsoft - Linux Distro"? Certainly a move away from the NT Kernel would be most welcome, and the hope - for many ISV's of a more "open & global" approach to device & application development would be a very positive move. Vista has certainly left something of a "bad taste" with many ISV's and users alike.
An interesting article, and one well worth watching for developments |
| #6 By 82766 (202.154.80.82) at Friday, August 01, 2008 02:12:17 AM |
|
#5 Certainly a move away from the NT Kernel would be most welcome
Why? Are you a kernel programmer? Do you really know how big (file size and memory loaded size) the NT kernel is? |
| #7 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at Friday, August 01, 2008 07:04:07 AM |
|
#5: "but given Microsofts history & struggling ability when it comes to developing stable and solid OS platforms"
How about these: Windows 2000 Windows XP Windows Server 2003 Windows Server 2008 Certainly the above OSes became more stable as Service Packs were released (just as any piece of software), but to suggest that MS struggles in this area is flat out wrong! Although Vista took much longer than it should have, and has had its share of growing pains, it has matured into one of the more stable OSes and it's 64 bit adoption rate is increasing. This post was edited by rxcall on Friday, August 01, 2008 at 07:14. |
| #8 By 7754 (206.169.247.2) at Friday, August 01, 2008 10:45:27 AM |
|
#5, Microsoft already went for "external assistance" for developing a solid OS, and that OS is NT. Gates hired much of the VMS team away from DEC, and essentially, NT "is VMS re-implemented." VMS is well-regarded as a solid OS, and the NT kernel builds upon that reputation. Much of what people don't like about Windows is in userland, not with the kernel.
NT until recently had the top 3 uptimes of sites Netcraft tracks. As of writing this, there's only one Linux host in the top 50 (#30), and the top W2k3 host is at #8 with 1363 days uptime. I think that qualifies as pretty solid. Still so few people have beyond a superficial understanding of NT. <sigh> |
| #9 By 1295 (64.207.240.90) at Friday, August 01, 2008 10:52:36 AM |
|
#5 Sadly you're probably showing your age and experience. The last "unstable" operating systems MS produced were Windows 95-90-ME and NT 3.51/4.0. Their instability in most cases was due to poor drivers and providing too many API's for applications to share information w/o considering the popularity of the internet and rogue applications that would exploit those API's.
Windows 2000 was stable at release and pretty rock solid a service pack in which has been the case for nearly all of their operating systems recently. Frankly NT4.0 was very stable as long as you were using hardware with solid drivers and were capable of locking it down since it came out wide open. Oh and... if you read about this new OS. It has an "NT Kernel" feature built in so don't expect that concept to stop. As far as ISV's and Vista... its the first Operating System that actually seemed to require programs be built correctly (well XP was a stepping stone). And frankly MS goes out of its way to provide API's to nearly every portion of its OS and most of its software. |
| #10 By 2201 (78.32.103.51) at Sunday, August 03, 2008 03:45:57 AM |
| #10 HAHAHA you're funny Latch-. Obviously not the REAL Latch, cos this Latch- misspells like an idiot ("colonel"? "micro$oft"? "sux"?). Idiotic troll. |
| #11 By 2201 (82.45.132.196) at Monday, August 04, 2008 08:21:34 AM |
|
Not when it's a name #12, which it clearly is here. You obviously need grammar lessons too.
Anyway, back to the story. Interesting news, although it does seem to be making more of a big deal than it really is. I agree with #2 here. |
