Microsoft Upgrades Vista Kernel in SP1

KrispySausage writes "One of the big features discussed in early speculation of Windows Vista SP1 was the kernel upgrade, which was supposed to bring the operating system into line with the Longhorn kernel used in Windows Server 2008. With Vista SP1 going RTM, there hasn't been so much as a peep from Microsoft about the mooted kernel update. Has it happened? Well the answer is yes it has. Presumably the main reason for Microsoft's silence on the subject is that as they're keen to promote the improvements and enhancements to Vista, rather than placing emphasis on a kernel upgrade, which some people might see as a risk of newly-introduced instability."

confused

I thought "improvements and enhancements" was MS marketing speak for "newly-introduced instability".

Re:confused

I've always figured that the period after they declare they'll no longer support the product is that sweet spot when it will finally function predictably.

Re:confused

It's interesting you say that--I just installed the release candidate for SP3 on my XP VM, and I'll tell you--it made a huge difference to the performance of XP. It now functions just fine with the meager amount of RAM I allotted to it, and it functions well with Office 2007 (i.e., it doesn't take forever to open or run slow) despite, once again, the meager amount of RAM I allow it to use.

And, of course, as you noted, XP is losing support next year--just as it's running better than ever!

Re:confused

And, of course, as you noted, XP is losing support next year--just as it's running better than ever!

No, it's not. Microsoft supports all operating systems for 2 years past the last service pack.

http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?p1=3223 [microsoft.com]

Re:confused

Ok, I don't like replying to myself, but I didn't do enough research.

When a new service pack is released, Microsoft will provide either 12 or 24 months of support for the previous service pack
When support for a product ends, support of the service packs for that product will also end. The product's support lifecycle supersedes the service pack support policy

Windows has a 24 month policy

Mainstream support for Windows XP Pro ends 4/14/2009, which means they're not going to sell it or add new features to the core OS.

Extended support for Windows XP Pro ends 4/8/2014, which means no new updates at all past that point.

consumer vs. geek

Not to mention that almost everything they've done to promote Vista has been aimed at the end-user, the joe-blow consumer. That user has no idea what the kernel is or why they should care -- it's just geeky mumbo-jumbo that would scare their target Vista audience.

Re:consumer vs. geek

Honestly, the user SHOULDN'T care!

Back in 'the day', Bill Joy said "Operating systems are like underwear - Nobody really wants to look at them." This was true until Linux started getting attention, and MS turned their efforts to becoming a 10-ton monster by selling OSes. Since then, the word OS has morphed into meaning a feature-rich (feature-laden?) bundles of applications along with the software infrastructure required to run them. (Whereas formally the OS is really just the infrastructure itself.)

Now we're talking about kernels. NOBODY other than developers and support folks should need to care about their kernel. In fact, most people don't know what a kernel actually is, and that's OK. In fact, it's even good--it's pointless knowledge for end users.

I'm not one to support MS, but not blathering on about the kernel in end-user release notes is the right thing to do.

Risky Business

"which some people might see as a risk of newly-introduced instability."

now who would think that? Honestly now, lets see some hands. You in the back, PUT YOUR DAMN HANDS IN THE AIR!

Re:Risky Business

"which some people might see as a risk of newly-introduced instability."

now who would think that? Honestly now, lets see some hands. You in the back, PUT YOUR DAMN HANDS IN THE AIR!

LOOKOUT! The guy in the back has a CHAIR! It's Ballmer, everybody DUCK!

Risk...

When adding ANY code, there is risk of security vulnerabilities and potential exploits. Sadly, most people seem to not know this.

What?!

Seriously, you're telling me that a version number jump in the kernel during a Service Pack is somehow news? And not only that but *unconfirmed* reports of that. *With screenshots*. Wow.

And what does it do. What does the new 0.0.1 add to Windows? Dunno. There isn't a word about it in the article, just some screenshots of version numbers.

How the bloody hell does this make the front page?

The Kernel can't be any better...

They didn't put any electrolytes in it...

I was kind of hoping to see a performance review..

..of SP1 RTM, kind of like what the exo performance/xpnet people did late last year.

I am one of the many who switched back to XP..performance on my tablet stunk with Vista. However, I did like some of the ease-of-use mobility features, but it wasn't worth the grief of performance and drivers.

I would like to run Vista....I just need a compelling reason to do so.

Re:I was kind of hoping to see a performance revie

Finally, another tablet user!

I occasionally game on my unit, so now I'm running an XP/Vista dual-boot, but msot of my work time is in Vista these days. For my unit, it doesn't seem to be appreciably slower than XP was, (but to be fair, I'm not running Aero Glass since the integrated graphics don't support it) and some of the features work noticeably better.

For me specifically:
- Handwriting Recognition is improved. (In both English, and Japanese.)
- Searching was greatly improved.
- Hibernation to file now restores properly every time.

System specs:
Toshiba R15-s822
1.6GHz Pentium M
160GB HD
2GB RAM
Vista Ultimate.

Would you tell me a bit more about your Vista experience? Specifically, was it the over-all experience that sent you running back to XP, or was it the tablet specific features?

I dont get it

I do not get it. On my Suse box I see Linux kernel updates all the time. So Microsoft Updated the kernel to match 2008. How do we not know the only difference between the two kernels was 10 lines of code or something? So the version/build number changed. We do not know what changed. Can a normal user tell exactly what the differences were between Windows 2000 and XP (NOTICE I SAID NORMAL USER!!!) no they can not. I do not think normal people (the majority of Microsoft's user base) will know the difference. Maybe someone working for an anti virus company will notice or maybe a slashdot reader but not the majority of the users. Honestly I think this is just more slashdot fud on the front page to bash Microsoft for doing something that Linux does every few months.

Re:I dont get it

Can a normal user tell exactly what the differences were between Windows 2000 and XP (NOTICE I SAID NORMAL USER!!!) no they can not.

Do "normal" users play games, have wireless networking, use webcams, unzip files, or switch between users?

That's just dumb

In other news, Linux v2.6.19.3 was released on February 5, 2007 (6 days after Vista). There have been 75 new kernel releases since then. Source: going to ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/ [kernel.org] and counting ChangeLogs since then.

I'm not sure why this is news.

Standardize code base

From the article:

So if you look at it one way, the Windows Vista "kernel upgrade" isn't a fundamental update, but rather, an alignment of the two operating systems.

This is a smart move. It's easier to develop one kernel than two, so standardizing the two made sense. They've had more time to beat on Server 2008 and test it, and are incorporating those changes.

The end user won't see this, but the end user doesn't care. Their flashy GUI and UAC (snicker) will run faster as a result.

You have to wonder

If that was a good idea. Microsoft spent so much time replacing things that worked with XP, for example Networking, that on Vista they were not mature at launch. I'm sure the new kernel is actually a nice piece of work, but IMHO they should wait until Windows Server 2008 SP1 then replace the kernel on Vista with one that is leaner and proven to be stable.

You know it's not that we don't like new features and upgrades, it's just that by 2007-2008 we expected Microsoft to be better at designing OSs. Should they get an automatic pass with every OS release just because "hey, you know they will get it right by SP2". I say phooey to that. Demand more.

Re:The real reason why SP1 is not ready

Maybe you should, you know, keep up. Network and sound drivers are both now userland. Network purposefully yields to the sound driver when its playing sound so you don't get choppy sound. There's a bug where it yields too much. And only if you're copying files on a LAN, IIRC. It was missed because they didn't do testing on a gbit network card.

This has been known almost since Vista's release... where have you been?

Re:The real reason why SP1 is not ready

"...where have you been?"

Waiting for his download to finish...

Re:What would be the difference?

This is in the area of Really Bad Analogies, but bear with me anyway: Windows 2003 was the followup to XP. Quite a few users who got their hands (ahem...) on Windows 2003 think that it is a very solid workstation OS, handling a few situations better than XP. If blatantly ignoring the lack of drivers, XP64 (which is derived from the 2003 codebase) is also solid. More polish went into handling high-load cases and simple bugfixing, things that were never justified to backport to XP. (SP2 carried over some things and added a few, so until Windows 2003 SP1 was released, there were two clear forks again with non-overlapping features.)

What does this mean for Vista SP1? Well, there should be very little reason to use Windows 2008 as a desktop OS. One could imagine that some geek/pro user workloads (network/disk I/O, anyone?) might be improved. On the other hand, these changes should already be in the SP release candidates, and the reviews of those haven't shown any big changes. A practical concern would be that the platforms should be similar from now on, like in the W2K days. I guess that will make at least some hardware vendor developers happy. Maybe this will also mean that additional hotfixes more acutely needed for server scenarios will trickle down to Vista.

Re:Bias

As much as I hate (detest, revile) to admit that a good Vista is good for everyone in someways (slower viruses, etc.), ... oh wait. I can't get over hoping Vista dies a horrible flaming death. I don't mean to flame/troll... I know I'm biased.

I am similarly conflicted. On one hand I want the spectacle. On the other I know that I'm just going to have to support it over the phone for my parents.

And let me just head off anyone who is going to suggest "install Linux for them" or "get them to buy a mac..." I will say that I live thousands of miles away from them and, quite frankly, they're getting older and the change would probably be more trouble than it is worth.

-matthew

Re:good for vista or bad for 2008 server?

What the hell are you talking about? Trollish troll is trollish eh?

Anyway, I'll bite. Windows Server 2008, like any decent server should have, is based on user permissions and if your user can't perform a given task, you can escalate to admin rights (OMG JUST LIEK SU!!) and do your thing. And obviously there won't be the same issues as on Vista because it won't be used as a desktop. At least it shouldn't be.

And the fact it's not a desktop means that the HD videos thing doesn't even matter.

Re:FAIL

First of all, I don't want to use Vista. I now run a half crippled XP because HP refuse point blank to supply XP drivers for this model.

This doesn't necessarily mean that the drivers don't exist. They'll be harder to find though. Here's what you do:

1. Go to Control Panel -> System
2. Click on the Hardware tab
3. Click the Device Manager button
4. For each device with a Red X or Yellow !
        a. Right Click and get Properties
        b. Click the Details tab
        c. Select "Matching Device ID" from the dropdown.

5. Shake Google for those Strings. Sometimes you'll hit paydirt just searching for the part before the ampersand.

You can also use tools like AIDA32 and Unknown Device Identifier to identify the hardware. Once you've identified your hardware, you'll probably do OK with the actual manufacturer's reference drivers. While it's possible that a vendor like HP is using slightly bastardized versions of standard chipsets that thus require custom drivers, that usually isn't the case. You may even be able to get the drivers from HP themselves if there are similar models that were supplied with XP.