Discussion Forums > Technology

Windows 7 and general bitching about OSes

<< < (10/197) > >>

iindigo:
Well I was partially suggesting that things such as the Programs start menu submenu and myriads of desktop shortcuts simply do not need to exist. Just have a cut-and-dry "programs go here" directory and make most applications self-contained (scattered DLLs everywhere = bad). Then if you really must have a program menu, just make it directly reflect the programs directory without the pointless shortcut middlemen.

extra2000:

--- Quote from: relic2279 on January 08, 2009, 04:41:32 PM ---Windows 7 is basically Vista SP3.
They rebranded it after some heavy modifications. It's still the same kernal.

--- End quote ---
Anything from past Windows 9x are based on the same hybrid kernel. That means 2000, NT, XP, Server, Vista, and even the latest 7 is based off the same kernel.


--- Quote from: sdedalus83 on January 09, 2009, 09:13:23 PM ---Yeah, NTFS is pathetic.  When you've got a filesystem that doesn't correct file fragmentation very well, combined with dynamically allocated virtual memory, it doesn't take too long for the whole system to bog down.  We shouldn't have to defrag and reboot once a month just to keep the system running and files intact.

--- End quote ---
Regardless of any file system you use, as long as the OS utilizes paging memory and you do a lot of activity everyday, the machine is definitely bound to form huge amounts of fragmentations. When you manually de-fragment a hard drive, it just relocates the files to remove the unused fragments, it does not necessarily make your system run better or make your files intact, it does that so when you add newer files, the file system can easily decide where to insert those newer files. Also, it's not only the hard drive that de-fragments, the memory also does this. Even if you don't notice it, the main memory does some sort of compaction by itself.


--- Quote from: vuzedome on January 10, 2009, 02:19:47 PM ---Driver support? None is perfect. Plug and play? If I can run DX10 games directly out of windows generic graphic drivers instead of installing the graphic card driver, then I'm impressed.

--- End quote ---
The generic drivers will just ensure that the desktop environment will be rendered properly. It is not possible to install an all-in-one super video adapter drivers for an OS because devices are different all out and graphics card manufacturers want control as well -which is why they not only provide drivers, but also application suite that consumers can use to tweak the device.


--- Quote from: iindigo on January 10, 2009, 06:21:12 PM ---make most applications self-contained (scattered DLLs everywhere = bad).

--- End quote ---
The reason why DLL files are created is for sharing program code and making the size of the executable smaller. It will also make the execution time faster because the OS will not need to load all those parts in the memory if it already exists. That said, it also saves memory space because functions stored in DLL files are only loaded once.

Linux, and any other Unix-Like operating systems, also uses the same type of files. Shared Objects are also scattered across the \root\bin subdirectory in many Linux Distributions.

iindigo:

--- Quote from: extra2000 on January 10, 2009, 06:40:40 PM ---The reason why DLL files are created is for sharing program code and making the size of the executable smaller. It will also make the execution time faster because the OS will not need to load all those parts in the memory if it already exists. That said, it also saves memory space because functions stored in DLL files are only loaded once.

Linux, and any other Unix-Like operating systems, also uses the same type of files. Shared Objects are also scattered across the \root\bin subdirectory in many Linux Distributions.
--- End quote ---

I am aware of this. Mac OS X does this as well in what it calls frameworks. Most frameworks that aren't already included with the system are small enough that they are typically included in each program's self-contained .app package. However, if something really needs to install a framework for system-wide use, there are one of two locations to copy to: /System/Library/Frameworks/ or ~/Library/Frameworks/. It's very clean that way, so even if an app needs to install a framework, there's no question about where it's gonna go.

Windows could do DLLs in a similarly clean fashion. Have one universal directory for ALL DLLs organized into subdirectories based on function (e.g. Network, Graphics, etc), and include small, app-specific DLLs inside of a self-contained package pseudo-EXE.

BluePenguin:
Windows 7 is not going to make a big difference for me.  Sure it will use way less computer resources but I have a 4gig ram laptop as it is and don't have any bog down in memory usage using vista.  I have more memory than I can use anyway.  As far as I have seen they look almost exactly the same too, UI wise.  I have not really looked too deeply into the technical aspects of it, but am I missing something that will advantage me (the average use) a lot?

mgz:
if its using less resources and is more efficient it = better battery life on your laptop

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page