| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Is Windows 7 the last major chapter in the Windows story? | |
|
||
| Time: 09:56 EST/14:56 GMT | News Source: InfoWorld | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
By the time Windows 7's adoption and replacement cycle is finished, the market will have shifted considerably, leaving Microsoft at a disadvantage | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 159 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:46:54 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 95132 (96.25.183.211) at 12/17/2009 11:52:15 AM |
|
Another windows version, another prediction of death or near death, what a waste of an article.
|
| #2 By 23275 (68.117.163.128) at 12/17/2009 1:20:14 PM |
|
uh... NO!
Windows 8 will be an OS where everything is virtualized and apps and device compatibility cease to exist as issues. Numerous enterprises will hold out for that and with the next OS, components only of future releases will be updated - as needed. And Frtiz's dream of having segmentation where consumer versions can go hog wild with the UI will be possible - a dream I happen to share. |
| #3 By 29664 (38.116.145.60) at 12/17/2009 1:42:20 PM |
|
This is the year of Linux desktop!!!!
heh |
| #4 By 20505 (216.102.144.11) at 12/17/2009 3:54:29 PM |
|
Ketch,
Does this mean that MS will finally ditch the flippin' Windows registry? |
| #5 By 89249 (64.207.240.90) at 12/17/2009 4:04:43 PM |
|
#1 lol no doubt
#2 rock and roll #3 Yet again :D #4 Easier said than done. I'd love to see it happen but just imagine the changes that would have to happen to all apps. God only knows but here's to hoping. |
| #6 By 1896 (68.153.171.248) at 12/17/2009 4:05:55 PM |
|
#2: Thanks Iketchum; very pleased to ride with you.
#3: I am not an expert about the registry but more I read about..... more I get confused: some people say and list what they state to be excellent reasons to get rid of the registry; some people say and list what they state to be excellent reasons not to get rid of it. The only thing all these people have in common is that they all seem to be very knowledgeable..... Go figure. |
| #7 By 8556 (173.27.242.53) at 12/17/2009 4:14:54 PM |
| #6: In the good old days of WfW 3.11 all one needed to do was copy over folders and the .ini files to run a program that was installed elsewhere. The registry is the installation cop that prevents this from happening with newer software without the need for hidden sector DRM, etc.. One can still copy old program folders and the programs corresponding .ini file and run without installation. PageMaker 6.5.2 runs fine on Vista without being installed. I'm sure that there are many more. However, many people lose their install programs or never burn disks for downloaded programs. Keys are lost also. The desire by software companies to have the public buy new software along with new PCs will keep the Windows registry in place for a long time with no easy copying from your old PC to the new one allowed. |
| #8 By 1896 (68.153.171.248) at 12/17/2009 4:32:13 PM |
|
#6: Good point.
Although I always burn at least two copies of programs I download as well to disseminate copies ol licenses in different places I have to admit that it a boring and time consuming. |
| #9 By 23275 (68.117.163.128) at 12/17/2009 6:09:13 PM |
|
First, the Windows Registry and a couple of key points.
1) It loads as a single page and is blisteringly fast - most especially when compared to other methods (which are a flipping mess and there is no other way to describe it). 2) Few people know that in attempts to replicate what the Windows Registry does, commerical *nix have evolved a database, which looks nearly identical to the Windows Registry and it attempts to work in the same way (by the way, this does now include OS X!). 3) Writing to the Windows Registry has rules. They are clear and pretty simple, BUT when programs violate them, it can produce an unstable system. That ended with what are called parallel DLL's - so one bad progam(mer) could not tank a system. 4) The Windows File Protection system features checks that continually monitor and clean the registry - including the creation of checkpoints and a comparer, which fixes the registry as a system cycles - when it loads, the single page is loaded and presto. Next post will be about Windows 8 and beyond. |
| #10 By 23275 (68.117.163.128) at 12/17/2009 6:16:36 PM |
|
One quick word about "DRM" in Windows. The code that runs in support of protected content, ONLY RUNS when protected content is played. Period. END.OF.STORY. Any assertion that "Windows DRM" is evil is bunk. It's there so ONE CAN PLAY Blu-ray movies and other protected content - the protected content path - so be happy Windows supports it and we can enjoy such content! No other system does! <You can tell I likes me some visually compelling Blu-ray movies!>
Ok. Remeber when all the pundits listed as a feature and how special it was that OS X Snow Leopard was SMALLER that Leopard!?! They were all with that and said things like: "This is the first time a new OS has been smaller than its previous version; a plus as compared to bloated Windows..." and on and on... and people believe that crap. Well all they did was drop support for all but the very newest Macs and in the process, dumped all the legacy support - with that PPC was out and so were a slew of applications, which no longer had support! So of course... the OS was smaller - IT DID LESS and SUPPORTED LESS. Next post I tell you why this is relevant and what it means for Windows 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12. |
| #11 By 23275 (68.117.163.128) at 12/17/2009 6:22:02 PM |
|
The biggest challenge to Windows is previous versions of it. Applications compatibility, primarily, is the issue for the businesses and enterprises that subsidize the consumer market.
Windows 8 will be entirely virtualized - now back to my reference to Snow Leopard. "Windows Bloat" is a BS notion. Yes, the size of the OS has increased, but relative to drive sizes it has actually been reduced to a non-issue. The reason Windows is bigger is, because as it supports new frameworks, foundation classes (like WFC90), etc... these foundations and libraries have to be there to support new code/apps and old code and apps. There presence on the DVD and in the OS image DOES NOT MEAN they load and run all the time, or at once. They are only accessed when they are needed - but they are there so older apps can run for years, even more than a decade. Now go ref what Apple did to PPC users again. Next up... what is going to be possble and why. |
| #12 By 23275 (68.117.163.128) at 12/17/2009 6:29:55 PM |
|
Ok... why have all those foundations if you're not going to use them? Why not virtualize them and as needed, access them and load them and most importantly, when they are not needed, leave them out of the image!
While a crude example, and used only to illustrate what I mean, this is how MS's three screens and a cloud stratgey is going to be so unique. Click to Run (CTR) will transform how foundations are delivered and only those that need them will use them. The entire new OS will be modularized and while there will be shared foundations, there will be absolute isolation. The kernel is already segmented in this way - low order, high order, etc.. and it will continue and only that which is needed any any one time, will be loaded and the full power of a system will be devoted to the tasks one desires. Any concern about apps compatibility will be gone and hardware support? Remember what I wrote about Vista and how a single interface for audio and video were created. Well... now there will be ONE INTERFACE period - for all devices. So much for drivers and driver issues - yes, they too will be virtualized... and so will networking, federations, credendtial caching, resource scheduling, and a council of virtual elders brokering processes and information in and out of untrusted networks - that was not a joke, by the way - NO SINGLE point of entry will be allowed and no single broker may provide permission... mon AND dad must both agree and so must the grand parents on each side of the family. Windows will be immune from any known form of attack - less the user who may still hurt himself. More... |
| #13 By 23275 (68.117.163.128) at 12/17/2009 6:39:28 PM |
|
Now... I need to be clear... I do not have some inside source at MS and if I did, I would not write about what I know to be true. I do this on my own and based upon my own work and research in the creation of software that is hardware and network aware - and vice versa. I compete with MS on a daily basis - some days I even win.
What I have written above is true. It will be in the next Windows. Two more very exciting things: 1) I mentioned hardware and network awareness above, because these will make it into the new OS, too - and be available for all devs. and 2) your profile will be federated and stored in many locations and every PC will be your PC - so will every Windows Mobile phone. Guys like me, and Frizt will be able to make the shells of our dreams and buy and trade components in a free and open market - yes... only the underlying code bits will be proprietary... the rest is going to be wide open and suitable templates will be plentiful to meet every need and every taste and just like switching channels, these UI/UX perspective will change, too - so Fritz, you can be wild and crazy one second and bookish and all corporate in the next. One last thing... every object you see will be surrounded with augmentation - contextual intelligence about what it is, how old it is, how much it costs, weighs, etc... whatever the context is. So will every object on your desktop. We do this now against business date and performance based project management - and it changes lives and makes people really wealthy - which makes them free. You think any socialist can hold up against that? No way. This one is in the bag! |
| #14 By 16797 (99.236.87.50) at 12/17/2009 7:19:55 PM |
|
Since Vista, important parts of registry are virtualized and all changes are redirected to user's profile folder (you can actually see it there: C:\Users\%user%\AppData\Local\VirtualStore) so registry pollution is not problematic, at least in my experience: I've installed (and unistalled) many apps (including many beta apps; like VStudio, etc) on my Vista yet it still runs really well.
Not sure why people still complain about it. BTW, Lloyd, great info. Thanks. |
| #15 By 13997 (166.166.196.88) at 12/19/2009 11:14:57 PM |
|
Registry arguments, really?
The registry was designed to get away from the .ini and configuration file designs of *nix OSes because they have NO CENTRAL management. This is why you find *nix desktop environment makers using 'registry' like concepts to 'unify' the settings in one location - and then it goes off to modify the 50 configuration files scattered across the OS FS. This is also why you find Apple uses a 'Registry' like concept for OS X, and is expanding this vision to something that works almost EXACTLY like the registry in Windows. People that somehow think the Registry is BAD or a BAD design have no clue what they are talking about. Back in the 90s when registry corruption because of lack of redundancy could occur it was an issue because of a CENTRAL LOCATION for settings. However, that is based on the Win9x OS or pre-XP NT OSes. Registry corruption is rare to impossible on XP, Vista, Win7. Why you might ask? 1) NTFS enforced 2) NTFS journaling 3) NTFS Copy on Write 4) Registry backup redundancy. And this doesn't even count the user level options of OS Roll back and other repair features. It would be easier to corrupt 10 random configuration files on a *nix based system than to actually bring down Windows with any type of registry errors. So ENOUGH with the registry is a bad design crap... If you really believe this, you need to write how bad Linux KDE or GNOME is or write to Apple and tell them to stop using a registry concept in OS X and further migration to a CENTRAL DATABASE OF SETTINGS - which is what the freaking registry is. ---------------------- In reference to the article, I get tired of people that have no concept of NT or the Windows OS architecture are ready to jump on a story trying to scare people into thinking Windows is at the end of the road in the future of technology. If they had a clue about Windows NT, they would know it has more room for advancement that any other OS technology, and is why things like the WDDM and other massive technology changes were basically just a flip of a few lines of codes and adding in the new technology, without having to dismantle the kernel to make these changes. Just compare Linux and the fair scheduler changes and the massive side effects this created, yet with Vista or Win7, new scheduling was rolled into the OS without a hiccup or even people realizing it is there. Seriously, time for people to go back and read the original Inside NT and get a freaking clue why NT is DESIGNED NOT BE UNIX NOR LIMITED BY CONCEPTS THAT DEFINE A UNIX OS. |
| #16 By 228224 (74.59.86.16) at 12/26/2009 12:27:25 PM |
|
I sure hope people don't think that Chrome like OSs will take over. Chrome is nothing but Linux with a browser desktop.
I think Microsoft should finally have a Linux based web browser and force Google to have the option to install the Linux IE in Chrome! :-) Judging by the fact that stores are selling Windows 7 64-bit on systems with 3GB of RAM, I suspect that Windows 8 may end up being just 64-bit. |
| #17 By 659394 (221.224.80.134) at 12/14/2011 9:03:25 PM |
|
evening dresses http://www.promdressforever.com/buy-evening-dresses-c-32.html
homecoming dresses http://www.promdressforever.com/buy-homecoming-dresses-c-11.html quinceanera dresses http://www.promdressforever.com/buy-quinceanera-dresses-c-12.html |
| #18 By 659394 (221.224.80.134) at 12/14/2011 9:03:59 PM |
|
evening dresses http://www.promdressforever.com/buy-evening-dresses-c-32.html
homecoming dresses http://www.promdressforever.com/buy-homecoming-dresses-c-11.html quinceanera dresses http://www.promdressforever.com/buy-quinceanera-dresses-c-12.html |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 159 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:46:54 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
