Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

More than half of Microsoft Vista needs re-writing

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 24, 2006 9:27:47 PM

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30516

yeah !!! they got a call from Intel asking to recompile apps with Intel compiler in order to be certain conroe would keep at least 10% over AMD.


remember about the optimisation relying on the name of the cpu ?

http://www.swallowtail.org/naughty-intel.html
intel admited nothing but ...

microsoft just received informations about the conroe architecture and had to recompile 60% of the finished product. to entirely use the new features of intel !
March 24, 2006 10:16:19 PM

Complete BS.
March 24, 2006 10:37:18 PM

Quote:
Complete BS.



werd. the inquirer is pure garbage.
Related resources
March 24, 2006 10:41:45 PM

Quote:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30516

yeah !!! they got a call from Intel asking to recompile apps with Intel compiler in order to be certain conroe would keep at least 10% over AMD.


remember about the optimisation relying on the name of the cpu ?

http://www.swallowtail.org/naughty-intel.html
intel admited nothing but ...

microsoft just received informations about the conroe architecture and had to recompile 60% of the finished product. to entirely use the new features of intel !


MS already responded: http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_No_Vista_Code_Changes/1143232877
March 24, 2006 10:42:50 PM

yeah right !

everybody is pure garbage except YOU fuzzy

http://www.smarthouse.com.au/Computing/Platforms?Articl...

well sometimes, the inquirer doesn't verify before to post the news but they mainly bring news from everywhere adding a breif comment

this link is their source

and that source gets it from microsoft
March 24, 2006 10:43:00 PM

deleted...can't read these days aparently... :cry:  :cry:  :cry: 
March 24, 2006 10:47:26 PM

Article has to be BS. Extremetech showed some of the stuff Vista wold have over 9 months ago. I doubt that MS would give Extremetech and other hardware sites some test copies if they felt that they would have had to redo 60% of the code. They started working on Vista as soon as XP came out. A radio tech jokey named Kim the Kommando, you decide wether or not she is reputable, said that MS was getting ready to work on their next O/S called Venice. Eitherway I highly doubt that Microsoft, with billions of investable dollars and legions of programmers that would make Steven Jobs envious I highly doubt that article is even remotely true.
March 28, 2006 1:34:27 AM

Business editions of Vista will available to volume licensing customers as scheduled, just not to consumers.

So that proves jacksh!t.
March 28, 2006 1:41:38 AM

MS and Intel are buddies. They keep desiging software with so much overhead that it takes a 4 ghz processor to do the work of a 200 mhz computer did 5 yrs ago.

We can put a stop to this maddnes.

DONT UPGRADE YOUR OS, then you will have performace gain.
March 28, 2006 1:48:23 AM

Shut up noob.
March 28, 2006 2:05:13 AM

Truth Hurts Don't IT
March 28, 2006 2:06:39 AM

Go away you stupid noob.
March 28, 2006 2:48:32 AM

I hate to tell you this but, calling him a "noob" doesn't prove your point.
March 28, 2006 3:34:51 AM

I actually enjoy telling Action_man that calling someone a noob doesn't prove his point.
March 28, 2006 4:18:54 AM

Of course, I'm dismissing his BS.
March 28, 2006 4:23:40 AM

LOL. You guys are clowns.
March 28, 2006 12:44:54 PM

Wow where have you been mpjesse? Back from vacation?

Maybe I'm just in the wrong area of the forums...
March 28, 2006 1:49:32 PM

Could anyone seriously believe that a 2 month delay would be all thats needed to rewrite 60% of the vista code?

If you put that in terms of years thats almost 2 years of coding! (based on the dev time of vista thus far, considering not all time has been spent coding!)

Intel may have been a buddy of MS historically, but they have recognised that AMD is also a player.

I seem to remember when 64 bit first hit with AMD64, MS were quite quick to start making noise about 64 bit computing
March 28, 2006 2:29:22 PM

I bet the problem has nothing to do with coding, but more of a distribution/license hack/support headcount problem, seeing that they can deliver to business before Xmas.
i.e. code is ready to go before Xmas (should have been out much earlier), but half the support staff will be on holiday, so they only have enough to deal with the business comunity.
Given that such a step change in hardware requirements (much more than 3.1-->win95, or ME-->XP), they will be inundated with "Visa doesn't run on my system" calls
March 28, 2006 2:31:57 PM

...but they dragged their feet getting Win x64 out until Intel started EMT64.
March 28, 2006 2:52:47 PM

XP64 bit was not designed for mass release and was designed for totally new architecture (sort of), I'm supprised that it was released at all.
I would have released win2003 workstation addition, rather than screw around with XP.

Conroe should be 100% compatible with the x86-32/x86-64 isa, why would MS wait just because a faster 100% compatible chip is around the corner.
If conroe has anything new in it (i.e. sse4), then that could be released as a patch at a later point.
March 28, 2006 3:25:10 PM

This absolutely makes sense. Intel has the bigger market share thus Microsoft needs to optimize their code for the majority. This is very smart of Microsoft to keep up with the new Technology and squeeze the most out of it. If it is 10% faster, hell I'll go for it no matter AMD or Intel


,,
March 28, 2006 3:45:20 PM

AMD needs un-optimized Intel platforms in order to be only 20% slower :) 

Well... Vista needs a re-do anyway (if it really has so much in common with XP).
March 28, 2006 4:14:13 PM

The claim that 60 percent of Vista needs to be rewritten isn't new, I saw that on a Microsoft insider's blog a couple of weeks ago. Sorry, can't find that link anymore, I'll look for it.
Anyway, the problem with that blog is that anyone, anywhere is allowed to post comments while identifying themselves as "anonymous." Supposedly this is to allow Microsoft employees to comment without fear of reprisals ... but it also opens the blog to informed imposters making claims that have no merit.
There's no way to tell if the claim was made by an actual Microsoft employee; if he is an employee, does he know what he's talking about; and whether he might be a disgruntled employee spreading lies about the company.
Gut feeling: Vista needs some refinements and massaging, but not a "60-percent rewrite."
March 28, 2006 8:18:53 PM

Do we need vista to be very different to XP?

If you want different there is alway Linux!

Windows is still windows, and as such I think we can expect that there will be a good deal of commonality between versions.

I think the vast majority of us would be hard pushed to really say that there are similarities beyond the GUI, and the names of processes in task manager :wink:

Evolutionary is still good, not every piece of software needs to be revolutionary with every release.

I like using XP, but there again i'm used to it. I skipped from 98SE and I still think that XP is a fantastic improvement over that.
More of XPs good points would definetly be a good thing.
March 28, 2006 8:44:32 PM

Total Crap..!

Do you have any idea how long does it take to rewrite 60% sourcecode of an operating system.

I am a programmer myself and I am working on a massive application which is still a baby compared to an operating system and we can't think of rewriting even 25% of this application.
March 28, 2006 8:48:53 PM

I have some interesting info to add to all this. I work for a retail chain and had a chance to meet a rep from Microsoft and had a laptop loaded with windows vista on it. And he had some experience and backgroud with some of the testing since hes a rep they know most of what happens. In any event i asked him about what platform of processors and gutts were working the best. And he told me that 95% of all their test machines run AMD x2 or AMD turion and a few run the new intel chip Conroe. And simply that the AMD is doing the best running the OS and excluding the new intel core that intel was have a hard time performing tasks on the new OS. Just thought it was intersting. and to go further to say it was actully and Intel event i was at that microsoft was invited as a 3rd party and the laptop he had at the intel event was running on the AMD turion. anyway enjoy!
March 28, 2006 9:08:42 PM

SuperFetch memory issue are the mostly likely cause of the delay. Memory control on AMD chips and then on the OS equal conflicts. Next, off the Sleep and Stand By issues. The OS directing the chip on voltage levels is what I am thinking.

The new sleep mode in Vista is not the XP sleep mode*(sleep mode would slow down all benchmark for a few days in XP). Why not just read about the features and think of the problems. I don't think it is just an AMD or Intel thing.

Vista Performance

I just found this link I hope it helps.

Side Note:
Cartoon Network is now airing Karate Kommandos with Chuck Noris... Chuck comes on at the end of the show to give you a lesson.
March 28, 2006 9:09:10 PM

That is a tasty little bit of info.

Its always fun talking to the 'real' employees at companies, and not just reading all the blurb and nonsense in the press and online.

I once spoke to a support engineer that worked with HP.
He told me that had more trouble with P4 machines than with the AMD kit.
The mini desktop cases were too compact for the toasty P4s and as a result tended to fail because of the excess heat build up!

I have not used a P4 or xeon (P4 class) that I thought was quick, even a 3.2 ghz processor.
The AMD I have at home - just a lowly 64 3000+ - has always seemed snappier in multi tasking than the P4. Its no surprise that Vista is running better on amds of the moment. I think that the additonal demands vista places on the system must be less dependent of clock speed than ever.

Notice that Conroe is the exception here. Conroe uses a much more sensible design, managing a higher IPC than before.
If we are talking multi cores, again AMDs existing design and intels upcoming design are much better at SMP (I assume) than the original dual core P4s
a b à CPUs
March 28, 2006 9:32:24 PM

Unless there refering to SSE4 which will do both Intel AND AMD some good there, i doubt the article is valid, afterall the current software benchmarked on conroe dam fast and Anandtech's own copy of fear flew.
!