Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Owen W

So much for no kernel change - "Windows 7 *is* Minwin

45 posts in this topic

A lot of people assume that MinWin is a Microsoft effort to completely rewrite the Windows Kernel from scratch. That may be based on earlier (limited) explanations about what it does, or it may have a lot to do with people assuming, due to people's efforts with open source software, that rewriting the kernel will solve all of Windows problems. Well, Mark Russinovich, Microsoft Technical Fellow and guru of all things NT Kernel, attempts to set the record straight in a 45 minute video from Channel 9. Microsoft also explains that "it *is* indeed in Windows 7."

This excited me, and I wanted to ask you guys, what you thought?! Hurrah for parralell processing! :)

Neowin Article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard about minwin back in it's conception. MS wanted to trim the fat off the kernel. at the time I read the article, it was a very small footprint. I'm glad to see MS has warmed up to a leaner OS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I heard about minwin back in it's conception. MS wanted to trim the fat off the kernel. at the time I read the article, it was a very small footprint. I'm glad to see MS has warmed up to a leaner OS

Agreed, it sounds like it was a bit of a jumbled mess of code that no-one realyl had been keeping an eye on. I'm glad that lower level operations have been seperated from the higher ones, as higher level programs getting access to lower level processes can really mash things up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in the original tech demo of minwin they were able to run the whole OS useing no more than 17mb of ram and 25 Mb of HDD space. however when the other parts of the OS running now windows 7 in its current form (albeit not finished yet) uses the same if not MORE system resources than windows Vista does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this thread exist allready...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
in the original tech demo of minwin they were able to run the whole OS useing no more than 17mb of ram and 25 Mb of HDD space. however when the other parts of the OS running now windows 7 in its current form (albeit not finished yet) uses the same if not MORE system resources than windows Vista does.

Well no, that's a common misconception, Windows 7 appears to be using most RAM alot of the time as rather than wasting RAM by leaving it Idle, it sends it to where it's needed. The same goes for the CPU.

So rather than having ram that's doing nothing 50% of the time, it's busy most of the time.

If you're referring to the amount of threads, thats a good thing, as more threads are better for Parralell processing, which is also a new part of Windows 7

Also, if you want no GUI on your OS, then so be it. A GUI is going to use resources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MinWin is NT isn't it? They are fine tuning the kernel when they add more lines of code.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be a good change for the operating system to get away from the aging NT... but don't fix something that isn't broken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's NT. Wow MinWin really has been blown out of proportion. This MinWin is totally different than the super stripped NT OS we saw. Get over it. It's NT. End of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Minwin is NT . Nothing new all they are doing was stripping things out to see howsmall they could get everything. It was more of an exercise in how to make windows more efficient.

So technically vista has minwin also since its just the same stuff just with some things stripped out and made seperately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Minwin is NT . Nothing new all they are doing was stripping things out to see howsmall they could get everything. It was more of an exercise in how to make windows more efficient.

So technically vista has minwin also since its just the same stuff just with some things stripped out and made seperately.

Well...no. As explained in the article things have been rearranged so higher process levels no longer directly interact with low level processes. This is a recipe for disaster (BSODs etc)..

So essentially Win7 has the same Kernel, but sorted properly into levels of processes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would be a good change for the operating system to get away from the aging NT... but don't fix something that isn't broken

Why?

NT 6 isn't the same as NT 3.5 , they share a few basic principles but other than that they're hardly comparable.

It's like saying Linux would do good to change to a new kernel since the Linux kernel is getting old... but then.. it's not linux anymore.

And the NT kernel is still one if not the best kernel out there with functions superior to the comptition. Untill we get a brand new oputer architecture, it doesn't make sense to change to a bran new groun up rewrote generation of kernels. heck een MacOS chose to stick to what was allready out there rather than do their own for OSX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And just to noobify the thread, what the hell is Minwin :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why?

NT 6 isn't the same as NT 3.5 , they share a few basic principles but other than that they're hardly comparable.

It's like saying Linux would do good to change to a new kernel since the Linux kernel is getting old... but then.. it's not linux anymore.

And the NT kernel is still one if not the best kernel out there with functions superior to the comptition. Untill we get a brand new oputer architecture, it doesn't make sense to change to a bran new groun up rewrote generation of kernels. heck een MacOS chose to stick to what was allready out there rather than do their own for OSX.

Agreed - NT is quite the revolutionary kernel, and it evolves with every version change, essentially giving a "new" kernel. I'm happy with it already, and can't wait to see what Windows 7 brings to build on the fantastic job they did in Vista

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well...no. As explained in the article things have been rearranged so higher process levels no longer directly interact with low level processes. This is a recipe for disaster (BSODs etc)..

So essentially Win7 has the same Kernel, but sorted properly into levels of processes.

Exactly its really still the same. Its not radically changed . Just made so the lower level stuff doesnt need to call the higher level things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And just to noobify the thread, what the hell is Minwin :p

Long Zheng posted a good article about it here last year. Check it out :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Long Zheng posted a good article about it here last year. Check it out :)

Thanks (Y)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well...no. As explained in the article things have been rearranged so higher process levels no longer directly interact with low level processes. This is a recipe for disaster (BSODs etc)..

Not really. It's mainly to speed and ease development and testing of the OS. THey aren't changing things that make it inherently more stable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really. It's mainly to speed and ease development and testing of the OS. THey aren't changing things that make it inherently more stable.

Theoratically it does - well according to the Windows Server example.

What I mean by this is the reason its not reccomended to install regular applications on servers is because they generally have default low level access, which can mash things up. Once a virus gets in there, it can do whatever the hell it likes with low level stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think they succeeded in making 7 more efficient. lets just hope it stays that way through rtm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well its kernel 6.1 so yes, its not identical to Vista(6.0) but we already knew that for years now. Plus from what I hear most the changes are Optimizations then changes in how it functions.

Someone said an example of when ONLY planing a DVD on a laptop, Win7 gets almost another Hr out of the battery then Vista does with identical laptops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well its kernel 6.1 so yes, its not identical to Vista(6.0) but we already knew that for years now. Plus from what I hear most the changes are Optimizations then changes in how it functions.

Someone said an example of when ONLY planing a DVD on a laptop, Win7 gets almost another Hr out of the battery then Vista does with identical laptops.

It's pretty sweet eh. What really annoys me is people flaming MS because 7 is built on Vista, but in reality, XP was built on Windows 2000 as well. It's the same thing, yet people are going on about how it should never be done

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MinWin isn't a feature or a product or a kernel. It's more an effort and set of guidelines and such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for clearing it up. I personally couldn't care less how Windows is made more functional, stable and fast as long as in time it does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.