Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (
More info?)
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:15:37 GMT, Carpe Diem wrote:
>On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 09:49:07 -0700, "ravenslay3r"
>>Will Longhorn have either a vastly revamped Desktop interface that is many
>>times more responsive, efficent, and less resource intensive?
No. "less resource intensive" sounds unlikely - it is the nature of
software vendors to create more software, not less, and software is
the natural enemy of hardware (think jockey-vs.-horse relationship)
>>OR a "lite-desktop" mode that you can login to with less eyecandy so that
>>the OS will be usefull on older machines like PII or PIII with less ram?
We can only hope, but probably not; if LH is a big shift, there may be
less desire to retro-fit it to legacy hardware. It depends whether
the push to fade out older OSs can overpower the reluctance to develop
and test drivers etc. for older hardware.
>>Also is there any remote chance their going to add a real command-line
>>interface that is usefull?
Ye olde batch language may be more powerful than you remember, as NT
adds several enhancements. For example, this...
@Echo Off
Set CDR=Y
Set CDRDir=NirSoft
If "%CDR%"=="Y" (
If "%SystemDrive%"=="%~d0" (
Start %~d0\Programs\RunScanner\RunScanner.exe /t 0
%~d0\Programs\%CDRDir%\%1
) Else Start %~d0\Programs\%CDRDir%\%1
) Else (
Copy %~d0\Programs\%CDRDir%\%1 %Temp%
If "%SystemDrive%"=="%~d0" (
Start %~d0\Programs\RunScanner\RunScanner.exe /t 0 %Temp%\%1
) Else Start %Temp%\%1
)
....is quite far from what MS-DOS batch would like.
> This is the 21st century, the 20th is over, you need to move on...
One of the features on the 21syt century is that there's an industry
geared to finding and exploiting defects in code that allow code
design to be trumped by surface exploit opportunities.
On this, MS hasn't caught up, let alone "moved on".
This is why I want to see the option of a leaner UI, not just so that
old PCs that shouldn't be trying to run LH can run LH less badly.
LH is very likely to continue the "do it for me" trend, where the OS
acts ahead of user intent. You may intend to ignore files, but the OS
may "touch" them to index them, build thumbnails, maintain SR or PF
data stores, etc. You may intend to list files without running them,
but the OS may "touch" the contents of these to populate tooltips or
other "View As Web Page" effects, pull out icon images, etc.
These risk surfaces that "touch" material in files, or even within the
open-ended metadata space that post-FATxx file systems offer, can
accidentally cause malicious code to be run, if such file or metadata
content is "shaped" to exploit the risk surface to that end.
Given that these "services" are themselves open-ended, malware can
entrench itself *as* such a service, thus positioning itself to read,
alter, destroy or infect your files as you "list" them, or simply
ignore them while backround services run about.
It's the nature of raw code defects to trump code design - so "our
software is designed to act safely" is meaningless unless some sort of
limitation of behavior is built into the hardware level - and that
would point away from bothering with legacy hardware that lacks this.
>-- Risk Management is the clue that asks:
"Why do I keep open buckets of petrol next to all the
ashtrays in the lounge, when I don't even have a car?"
>----------------------- ------ ---- --- -- - - - -
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram