Windows 7 kernel to shrink in size

jmke · 19th October 2007, 16:12

MICROSOFT top boffin Eric Traut has emerged from his smoke filled lab to talk about the future Windows 7 kernel.

The people at Vole have been a mite concerned that the Windows kernels are getting a little bloated and have told Traut to come up with something a little more efficient.

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...tprint-windows

19th October 2007, 22:26

First toughts on this is that this presentation has no usefull information at all. They've only showed what's the beginning of a windows kernel, of course it's small, everything starts small ... but 1-2 years later I suppose they'll have a kernel that's as big as Vista's kernel

. Plus, whatever isn't put in the kernel to save space is probably added as a service or dll afterwards so you'll end up with a big sucker again

.
They realy should go back to the Win9x era, the OS was lightweight, it had all the programs you'd need (at least it had a defragger that shows you what's going on) and nothing more, nothing less. If you'd combine that with the hardware compatibility and the management features like in XP, then you'll have a good OS. I mean, why do I need all those services like readyboost, superfetch and indexing when they are completely useless, why do I have to waste disk space for a calendar, mail client, ... if I don't use it.

Open minded simplicity, that's what they need, someone that can say: "do we realy have to add that ? NO we do not !

BlackRabbit · 20th October 2007, 09:33

A .dll file (or other kind of modular design) would be much more effecient, as only those files that are really needed will be loaded..

19th October 2007, 16:12	#1
jmke Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium Posts: 79,010	Windows 7 kernel to shrink in size MICROSOFT top boffin Eric Traut has emerged from his smoke filled lab to talk about the future Windows 7 kernel. The people at Vole have been a mite concerned that the Windows kernels are getting a little bloated and have told Traut to come up with something a little more efficient. http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...tprint-windows __________________

20th October 2007, 09:33	#3
BlackRabbit Member Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 1,202	A .dll file (or other kind of modular design) would be much more effecient, as only those files that are really needed will be loaded.. __________________ >> imagehosting.jumbee.net -> Free Image Hosting >> favorites.jumbee.net -> Bookmark Manager >> www.datanuke.be -> Lanparty Network Rental, community & reviews

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
175 Windows 7 Tweaks, Tips, and How-To Articles	jmke	WebNews	2	23rd October 2009 14:00
Microsoft Patch Tuesday: 5 Criticals, 2 Important, 1 Moderate Patch	jmke	WebNews	0	14th April 2009 18:47
Microsoft Security Bulletin Summary for September 2008	jmke	WebNews	0	9th September 2008 19:20
Windows 7 Won't Have Compact "MinWin" Kernel	jmke	WebNews	0	28th May 2008 15:31
Microsoft Security Bulletin Summary for August 2007	jmke	WebNews	0	14th August 2007 22:21
Microsoft Security Bulletin Summary for February 2007	jmke	WebNews	0	14th February 2007 00:25
Microsoft Security Bulletin Summary for June 2006	jmke	WebNews	0	14th June 2006 20:51
List of fixes included in Windows XP Service Pack 2	jmke	WebNews	1	17th August 2004 15:03
Microsoft Changes Mind on Windows 98 Support	jmke	WebNews	0	13th January 2004 12:04

19th October 2007, 22:26	#2
wutske Posts: n/a	First toughts on this is that this presentation has no usefull information at all. They've only showed what's the beginning of a windows kernel, of course it's small, everything starts small ... but 1-2 years later I suppose they'll have a kernel that's as big as Vista's kernel . Plus, whatever isn't put in the kernel to save space is probably added as a service or dll afterwards so you'll end up with a big sucker again . They realy should go back to the Win9x era, the OS was lightweight, it had all the programs you'd need (at least it had a defragger that shows you what's going on) and nothing more, nothing less. If you'd combine that with the hardware compatibility and the management features like in XP, then you'll have a good OS. I mean, why do I need all those services like readyboost, superfetch and indexing when they are completely useless, why do I have to waste disk space for a calendar, mail client, ... if I don't use it. Open minded simplicity, that's what they need, someone that can say: "do we realy have to add that ? NO we do not !