Recommended Posts

There will be a re-write at some point. MS is working with other vendors within the TC group. It's still a research group, but promises radical changes.

What does the trusted computing platform have to do with a brand new OS, especially considering that it's not just a "research group" and that the technology they promote (TPM) has been shipping for years and is supported by Windows? Am I missing something?

While building an Operating System from scratch has its benefits, it takea a long time to start over, even if your basing it off some code from the original. Having experience, it isn't as easy as it looks. Microsoft has come a long way, and to change that would not only be a difficult process, but a long process as well.

If I am thinking the way you all are saying it should happen, it would take at minimum 1 and a half years to get the basics, and additional time to get all the features and frameworks done.

I believe that windows should really reconsider its hardware interactivity i.e. Its KERNEL and all that stuff ....

and i am of the opinion that microsoft has enough funds to start a very new project starting with nothing and coming up with a fully stable, user friendly....or to be precise "user customizable".... new OS on a new platform...windows people need to understand what an end user desires and how the interface should be....

these people should grasp all the good things wich users like about all the operating systems..like MAC,etc...and make a new one with all newbies......

wat say ???

...

GDI+ is a software library that offers certain software-based features that sit on top of GDI and a few other APIs. This is entirely different from D2D which is Direct3D.

I don't see what that has to do with how much use it's going to get.

Direct2D can run in software or in hardware (and even in software mode is faster than GDI+), you can create a native Direct2D context for a control or interoperate it with GDI (create a Direct2D surface based off the GDI surface or create a GDI surface off of a Direct2D surface)

Rewriting all their GUI code to use Direct2D underneath and then expose the same GDI based API it currently does (otherwise you risk breaking every single app that uses those API's) won't achieve anything, but it would take a lot of time.

I believe that windows should really reconsider its hardware interactivity i.e. Its KERNEL and all that stuff ....

The kernel's fine. The userland ain't.

Also, nothing stops Microsoft from building a new userland and run it side by side, until it can consider dropping the old Win32 ****. After all, that's one of the uses of this whole subsystem **** the system comes with.

Rewriting all their GUI code to use Direct2D underneath and then expose the same GDI based API it currently does (otherwise you risk breaking every single app that uses those API's) won't achieve anything, but it would take a lot of time.

You misunderstand. The idea is not to "rewrite it" to use Direct2D. Rewriting any part of Windows is a dumb idea. The idea is to create a new modern GUI framework that is all D2D. No expensive interop.

The kernel's fine. The userland ain't.

Also, nothing stops Microsoft from building a new userland and run it side by side, until it can consider dropping the old Win32 ****. After all, that's one of the uses of this whole subsystem **** the system comes with.

NT can't actually run without the Windows subsystem though. Technically most of Win32 doesn't even run as a subsystem anymore. Having said that, I completely agree. People have this obsession with "the kernel" when most of Windows' problems have nothing to do with it.

One problem with a complete re-write... We start from scratch, you'd get a massive percentage more errors and bugs than you would with a new release of the same OS.

Precisely. A complete re-write is completely unfeasible. Joel Spolsky said it best...

The idea that new code is better than old is patently absurd. Old code has been used. It has been tested. Lots of bugs have been found, and they've been fixed. There's nothing wrong with it. It doesn't acquire bugs just by sitting around on your hard drive. Au contraire, baby! Is software supposed to be like an old Dodge Dart, that rusts just sitting in the garage? Is software like a teddy bear that's kind of gross if it's not made out of all new material?

...

When you throw away code and start from scratch, you are throwing away all that knowledge. All those collected bug fixes. Years of programming work.

You are throwing away your market leadership. You are giving a gift of two or three years to your competitors, and believe me, that is a long time in software years.

The article I quote is a fantastic article about why restarting from scratch is completely moronic from both a financial and strategic perspective, you can read the whole thing HERE.

  • 1 month later...

$ tar -zxpf /mnt/cdrom/OSX10.7 Windows8.tar.gz; cp Windows8.tar.gz /mnt/shares/Windows/users/Steve Ballmer

From [email protected]

To [email protected]

Attachment: Windows8.tar.gz

Here is a fresh start for Windows 8.

Steve

_________

I'm purely kidding here, but it will be interesting to see if there is some feature creep from 10.7 into Windows 8.

I do like how Apple has the drag and drop containers for Applications in the App folder. It makes some of the system management easier and cleaner even for 'advanced users'. It would be nice to see this and some backing away from the registry.

I've tried 7 and its very nice. The GUI takes some getting used to. So if there is anything that I'd want back in Windows, it would be different GUI options for simple to more advanced use, an easier scripting option (e.g. Automator in OS X) and more default command line apps for backups, CVS type repository. In other words a bit more Unix-y options in Windows 8.

IMO there will never be a rewrite of the Windows OS, the current code will continue evolving as it has always done, it will be cleaned modulized and improved but ultimately will be based off of previous code.

Secondly, I'm not from Britain, I'm from America, where we aren't scared to death of the letter Z.

Yeah, i'm British and i haven't slept for weeks because of those damn Z's :rolleyes:

I hope Microsoft sort out a couple things by Windows 8. Firstly, there isn't a need for a total rewrite, I would assume that the code is probably very good.

It would be pretty sweet if Microsoft removes the registry and implements an application install system similar to OS X. Although I guess this would break compatibility, may be add a new middle layer for older programs - like a virtual registry.

Also, I hope Microsoft carries on the trend set with Vista and 7 of making Windows a more modular system. Just read: http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009...lims-down.ars/2

It is about time Microsoft made the switch to NT for Windows CE.

To be honest though, I just hope Microsoft makes Windows 8 even faster, more usable and more secure. These are the things that matter, Microsoft's aim is to make a easy to use operating system not design an architecturally perfect OS that a small number of users will appreciate.

It would be pretty sweet if Microsoft removes the registry

Why? What would you replace it with? Tens of thousands of text files? How would that be "pretty sweet?" It sounds more like a reliability nightmare and performance killer.

The only thing the registry can be replaced with is another database, and then you've just gone and recreated the registry. What I think you really want is for third-party applications to store their private configuration data in the application folder instead of the registry. That's fine, but that has nothing to do with the registry itself (which is primarily used to store operating system data, and is just a neutral database).

Maybe your complaint is also that the OS data stored in the registry is confusing (because it's not designed to be edited by hand), but this wouldn't change if you switched to another storage medium, since the OS would still have to store the exact same data.

It is about time Microsoft made the switch to NT for Windows CE.

A little re-factoring doesn't make NT appropriate for the kind of hardware CE is designed for.

Microsoft do not need to rewrite..

Since XP the Windows OS has been reliable. I have not moved on from XP as I have no real incentive and for MS that must be an issue. I'm a long term and experienced computer user. Vista offered me minor improvement at the cost usability, 7 corrected this but offered no more incentive.

Microsoft has done a lot for the casual PC user, but what about the experienced user who wants more from their PC? I love the detail, I love the settings and the code extensions that add that extra feature that goes over the head of the day to day user but makes my system do what I need. With each new release of Windows I see small features that appealed to me disappear and nothing to replace them. My hope is that Windows 8 offers more control over Windows Explorer and all the files I have. Over the last 15 years Ive built up a large database of files and preferences as to how i use my PC, it is my hope that in the future Microsoft recognise this in the operating system they offer to the average user who has had been happily using their operating system now for about 15 years.

I hope they get rid of Aero Glass in Windows 8.... unlikely... but I wish.

Why? I've heard some people complain before, but I don't get it. Aero Glass is pretty simple and clean. It's not minimalistic, no, but it's certainly not cluttered. However, minimalistic visual styles wouldn't be best for the casual user, so it's best to let the advanced users download and apply it themselves. Additionally, you have a fair amount of control over widths, sizes, colors, transparency, etc. If it's the 'glass' thing that bothers you, you can just turn off the transparency. What aspect(s) do you wish they would change?

urely kidding here, but it will be interesting to see if there is some feature creep from 10.7 into Windows 8.

I do like how Apple has the drag and drop containers for Applications in the App folder. It makes some of the system management easier and cleaner even for 'advanced users'. It would be nice to see this and some backing away from the registry.

Windows DOES support that, World of warcraft for example works that way. It's just that not many write their programs to work that way.

Why? I've heard some people complain before, but I don't get it. Aero Glass is pretty simple and clean. It's not minimalistic, no, but it's certainly not cluttered. However, minimalistic visual styles wouldn't be best for the casual user, so it's best to let the advanced users download and apply it themselves. Additionally, you have a fair amount of control over widths, sizes, colors, transparency, etc. If it's the 'glass' thing that bothers you, you can just turn off the transparency. What aspect(s) do you wish they would change?

1. Too much glass.

2. Basic, are you kidding me? it's ugly, even with Aero still enabled and Transparency off.

3. Windows Classic? horrible. Looked better in XP, it's now officially destroyed.

I love Windows 7, it's great.. I like the Superbar but they need some Graphic Changes.

This doesn't look nice by any means.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!