Vista's kernel is replaced with Longhorn's in SP1

[Mr. Smith]

Vista SP1 doesn't just contain numerous fixes, the kernel has been replaced!

This came to my attention when I saw the Notable changes in Windows Vista SP1 and the discussion around it which led me to Microsoft replaces Vista kernel in SP1

Vista SP1 RTM

Server 2008 RTM

Vista's kernel came under a lot of criticism so perhaps with this new and improved kernel and the fixes Vista will become the new XP... I for one am interested and will pick up Vista when SP1 becomes public.

 

[JN]

Oooh sounds promising. I too am waiting for SP1 before making my final decision on Vista.

 

[Toxcity]

Fantastic!

Server 2008 here I come!

Nice find Smithy!

 

[Rastalovich]

Watching a seminar demonstration of the core of Windows 7, the guy was talking about at the central core of what will be Vista or Vienna to come, is a single "brain" (if u like), that in itself can be installed on a machine with under a gig of a footprint and operate under memory of around 40m. He ran it from a console, but launched from Windows 1 to Vista off it, virtually.

Screenshots are out there. There are also alot of what are claimed to be fake ones also. (why would u make a fake ??)

This central core is the heart of all the OS to come, and all the "junk" that determines a Vista or Server or Vienna or whatever, pro/ulti/bus/home edition, is what is added on to it.

It is a smart way to dev in a way financially, in that u can make pretty stuff and just bolt it on and sell it again. The very smart way will be when they make fundamental improvements to the core.

The launching of what can be called new OS(s) will be 2.5 years, from this point, or 2006 anyway. Not all what we would previously call service packs will be parsed as updates, some will be `new` OS(s) dependant on ... ??

In a way, u can say Vista is Server, to that extent, the differenting features that are tagged on around the core is what makes the OS what it is. And here`s where the reg and screenies breakdown, imo anyway. Each bit of `extra` u leave in or add to the core changes the build number.

This happens with both Vista and XP atm. If u take the likes of vlite/nlite and strip things from your install disks, or add kbs I spose, the build number changes. I got 4 different build numbers at home.

How does the same number exist on both reg screenshots ?

The 64bit/32bit stories differ to what mr m$ said a bit. But there are so many stories out there also. What was made clear was that 64bit is the way the newer OS is going, with of course the 32bit emul as it is. How does this kernel drop into Vista 32 ?

This new kernel rev chucked into Vista and existing things working around it ? eek. I know there`s rollout information on the m$ site for admins, with pro/cons.

Should be good fun.

 

[mrapoc]

New kernal? It can only get better surely?

 

[nathan]

Watching a seminar demonstration of the core of Windows 7, the guy was talking about at the central core of what will be Vista or Vienna to come, is a single "brain" (if u like), that in itself can be installed on a machine with under a gig of a footprint and operate under memory of around 40m. He ran it from a console, but launched from Windows 1 to Vista off it, virtually.

Screenshots are out there. There are also alot of what are claimed to be fake ones also. (why would u make a fake ??)

This central core is the heart of all the OS to come, and all the "junk" that determines a Vista or Server or Vienna or whatever, pro/ulti/bus/home edition, is what is added on to it.

It is a smart way to dev in a way financially, in that u can make pretty stuff and just bolt it on and sell it again. The very smart way will be when they make fundamental improvements to the core.

The launching of what can be called new OS(s) will be 2.5 years, from this point, or 2006 anyway. Not all what we would previously call service packs will be parsed as updates, some will be `new` OS(s) dependant on ... ??

In a way, u can say Vista is Server, to that extent, the differenting features that are tagged on around the core is what makes the OS what it is. And here`s where the reg and screenies breakdown, imo anyway. Each bit of `extra` u leave in or add to the core changes the build number.

This happens with both Vista and XP atm. If u take the likes of vlite/nlite and strip things from your install disks, or add kbs I spose, the build number changes. I got 4 different build numbers at home.

How does the same number exist on both reg screenshots ?

The 64bit/32bit stories differ to what mr m$ said a bit. But there are so many stories out there also. What was made clear was that 64bit is the way the newer OS is going, with of course the 32bit emul as it is. How does this kernel drop into Vista 32 ?

This new kernel rev chucked into Vista and existing things working around it ? eek. I know there`s rollout information on the m$ site for admins, with pro/cons.

Should be good fun.

at the top of your post are talking about whats called "server core" in server 2008? I sat in a seminar couple months back regarding all the new virtualization stuff and they were going on about how you could have a low foot print core install.

Desktop OS's seem to follow server OS's these days

 

[realitybytes]

Yes has been microsofts goal for along time since the mention of "trusted computing", essentially having a snap on method and you only purchase the things you need within the operating system, the next step is to actually try and tie us up in to a subscription based model.

Time will tell.

 

[Rastalovich]

at the top of your post are talking about whats called "server core" in server 2008? I sat in a seminar couple months back regarding all the new virtualization stuff and they were going on about how you could have a low foot print core install.

Desktop OS's seem to follow server OS's these days

That`s one of the things that supprized me with how their OS(s) are arranged recently.

It`s not, in a sense a `server core`, they`d call it a windows core version whatever. Add a few things to it and it becomes Server 2008, and a few more (probably pretty things to it) and it becomes like a Vista 2008.

The size of the overhead he required for the windows 7 core he was running, albeit from a console, was very very small. And seeing Windows 1 to 6 spawning off it was quite funny.

Some strange things u learn about companies. Reading a book on cross platform programming, the guy in it was previously involved in the netscape team. He was talking about how Apple had be developing their OS on Intel based machines at-the-same-time as the PPC/G series - which kinda answered a question for me about how they were able to port the 68k/risc code to x86 so quickly. Reason was, they already had it, which came in handy when Intel based machines became the only way to go.

Yes has been microsofts goal for along time since the mention of "trusted computing", essentially having a snap on method and you only purchase the things you need within the operating system, the next step is to actually try and tie us up in to a subscription based model.

Time will tell.

Spose it would depend it they feel they can get more money out of people doing it this way, or making up the batches themselves into what used to be 2/3 editions, to what`s now 4/6 editions - perhaps in 2009 there will be 10 different versions with jumps of 100s of $ in between.

 

[nathan]

i see, i was talking about server 08 alone, not there future OS's. This is what i was talking about.