Posts Tagged ‘7’

Up in the cloud

October 1, 2008 Leave a comment

Microsoft has a number of core business revenue streams – otherwise known as cash cows. Despite strong indications that regardless of the recent lightweight application paradigm shift to the ‘cloud’ Microsoft have remained staunchly of the view that the operating system, as we know it today, will still be present in the future. So todays announcement indicating a potential branching from the desktop application centric philosophy is quite astonishing. According to ComputerWorld, Microsoft are looking to unveil a version of Windows codenamed  ‘Windows Clouds’ within a month. It will be very interesting to see the approach Mircosoft take with this project considering they are were quite keen to emphasise this will not detract from the ongoing Windows 7 work which is the planned successor to Windows Vista.

I previously weighed in on my opinion on cloud computing and very little has emerged to change my mind so far. I recently tried gOS v3 codename Gadgets which is the lightweight Linux distribution formally its own flavour based on the Enlightenment DR13 window manager and I am not that impressed. I found the integration between Google services (presented via barely concealed HTML widgets) and the operating system felt very amateurish. This coupled with the fact that version 3 is based on the more feature rich Gnome window manager, any assertion of this being a ‘stripped down’, light weight operating system for ‘netbooks’ sounds rather strained.

I do not doubt that one day, a certain percentage of desktops and laptops will be light weight (or thin client) systems accessing storage, applications and processing power from a ‘mothership’ in much the way cloud computing is evolving now. However it seems to make much more sense for a family or household or even a group of people to buy a central ‘home server’. This will however be very different to Windows Home Server and will resemble more the old style dumb terminals where multiple clients connect to one central machine.

Well that is my prediction, we will talk in ten years! For now, long live monster power rigs! đŸ™‚ As a final note, it will be interesting to see where Apple fit into this in the coming years. iSlim? iWeb? iJot?

MinWin is nothing new, and the road to ‘7’

February 8, 2008 1 comment

Tgdaily has a follow up on the leaked Windows 7 video I previously blogged about. It turns out, as I and others predicted, Windows 7 milestone 1 (which is what the video shows) is essentially a patch to Vista SP1. What is surprising is that Milestone 1 acts more like an upgrade installation than a standalone install like the Longhorn Milestones.

After jumping through hoops using the Vista Standard installation, the tester was presented with a very Vista-esque interface which consumed a roughly similar amount of RAM to ‘vanilla’ Vista. The reviewer noted that it was difficult to discern any difference between Vista’s Kernel and the leaner MinWin kernel we know Microsoft are experimenting with. Of course this is simply Milestone 1, a very early build which will be greatly worked on in the coming months.

I did a bit of digging into the MinWin kernel and found a fantastic article on Paul Thurrott’s supersite. Despite the recent interest in MinWin (no doubt fuelled by public perception of Vista,) it is not a technology that Microsoft has been testing recently. In fact, the idea of a compartmentalised kernel has existed in one form or another for many years. Back in 2003 Microsoft talked a lot about separating the key components of their upcoming operating system to allow for a ‘core’ system which could then be added to in a building block like fashion. People in the industry rejoiced assuming that this would allow for extensive componentisation as can be found in Linux, however in practice, Microsoft used this to create the 5/6 different versions of Vista and had the absolute say in what was included. Recent programs like vLite allow some flexibility however this does not take advantage of componentisation as nLite existed for Windows XP long before. Windows Server 2008 was the first product to really offer componentisation in the most accurate sense and is called Server Core.

Server Core is a command line tool that operates with no GUI (explorer) running (or even needing to be installed,) and allows for a machine to be customised to fit a specific role (or roles.) Such roles could be DHCP, File/print server, Virtualisation, IIS 7.0, Terminal Server, Domain Controller etc and it allows for the server to customise exactly what is installed and run. This in turn simplifies the update procedure as only components that are used (or needed for dependency reasons) are updated as and when appropriate.

“…Server Foundation (MinWin) was a core server OS component that would provide minimal server OS functionality and be used as the basic building block for job-specific server implementation…” (source)

Windows ‘Longhorn’ Server has been in development a number of years, and although Server Core is different in terms of its scope, from a semantic point of view, it is identical in concept to MinWin. Even before this, Windows 2000 (and XP and even NT 4.0) were built in a way so as to increase separation between user space code that had to be run at a kernel level (e.g. drivers) and native system code to improve stability and security. Although for different reasons, this is still a massive step away from the ‘everything in the kernel’ approach of 9x and for good reason.

Interestingly there appears to be a little conflict between Microsoft’s recent announcement saying they would wait at least three years before releasing a new operating system (which would put the release date at around 2010/11) and the documentation obtained along with M1 which suggests a latter quarter 2009 release as I previously predicted. Still, Microsoft have shown their deadlines are flexible of late so any speculation at such an early stage is premature.

Windows 7 ‘leaked’ video

January 28, 2008 1 comment

It appears Engadget have picked up on the suspected Windows 7 video doing the rounds. However, on watching the video, looking at the pictures and digging for more details on the originating website, I am less than convinced this is, in-fact Windows 7. Registry and resource editing can change just about anything in XP and Vista along with theming and photoshopping.


The video appears to show a very Vista-like UI with a few of the propery pages claiming to be Windows 7. Infact, fraud or not, it is Vista for now rather than 7, Vista’s version number is 6, this video appears to show a build with version 6.1 not 7. This however does not suggest it is a fake – anyone who remembers seeing the early longhorn builds remembers seeing an essentially XP like interface with some new code running underneath.

User interfaces traditionally are added towards the end of the development cycle (as illustrated by the Longhorn Milestone 3 screenshot courtesy of Winsupersite below.) Inconsistent version numbers and the complete lack of focus and details makes me cynical about it’s authenticity.

However there has been more leaked than just a blurry video, this blog has a series of interesting pictures purportedly showing various management tweaks, from a seemingly reworked control pannel to a new simplified text size control which moves away from the size by DPI settings of XP and Vista. Innovations and improvements from version to version are to be expected, however in Windows Vista the control panel was changed quite a bit, it seems odd that Microsoft would already be retweaking it to make it similar to the ‘classic’ control pannel. Of course, I could be way off and this could just be an additional filter that can be applied.

Of particular interest to me was the ‘powershell’ version of the command prompt. Whether this is a power tool or a program that is intended for release with Windows 7, the change in syntax from the Windows time honoured ‘DIR‘ to the Unix ‘LS‘ makes for a curious change. I may be way off the mark, but if Windows 7 is actually adopting a smart user privilege level system (like *nix has had for years and Vista made a poor attempt at) the PS prefix could be indicative of some type of super user level privilege (equivalent of su or sudo) for running commands. The question is, why would you need a command prompt (or powershell) if you are not performing power user level maintenance? Command prompts have been disused for simple file transactions since Windows 3.x / 95.

We should get more details during the WHEC – until then, I learned an interesting tit-bit, Microsoft are currently developing Office 14 (Office 12 was 2007) – they skipped Office codename 13 due to superstition đŸ™‚


%d bloggers like this: