The Windows 10 April 2018 update has arrived! Get the new Dell XPS 15, starting at $999.99
  1. wpcontinue's Avatar
    Theres something that bugs me. I don't get the whole excitement and buzz around this thing - one Windows kernel on all form factors and devices, having in mind that the NT kernel is known for its bugs, unreliability, viruses and malware attacks, exploits, unreasonable crashes, freezes, slow work, driver issues and overal problems since ages. For almost 20 years Windows NT is target of endless jokes and well-grounded anti-comments by the whole world... Seriously, why the excitement. You want your phones, tablets, xboxes, etc. to be like your PC? And Im not just talking about Windows 10 on these devices, just look at WP8 already.. resuming/loading screens, slow work so on and so forth. Windows CE was kind of stable. Thats why the only stable OS with the name Windows was actually WP7 (and previous work). Thoughts?
    11-28-2014 02:40 AM
  2. futurix's Avatar
    having in mind that the NT kernel is known for its bugs, unreliability, viruses and malware attacks, exploits, unreasonable crashes, freezes, slow work, driver issues and overal problems since ages. For almost 20 years Windows NT is target of endless jokes and well-grounded anti-comments by the whole world...
    It's just that some people don't believe everything that is written on the Internet

    NT kernel is stable, fairly fast, well designed, and many issues with it are a problem of uneducated user.
    marratj and Xabier Granja like this.
    11-28-2014 05:48 AM
  3. wpcontinue's Avatar
    Well i am Win user for ~20y and i can confirm all these problems with NT
    11-28-2014 05:54 AM
  4. rodan01's Avatar
    WP already use the NT kernel, since 8.0.

    Windows 10 doesn't bring anything new. For the desktop is just Windows 7 with tiles, for mobile is just a refreshed UI. Universal apps are here since 8.1 but nobody is writing apps for the platform.

    So, Windows is dead in the consumer market, and Windows 10 won't change anything.

    Sent from my GeForce7050M-M using Tapatalk
    11-28-2014 09:16 AM
  5. Michael Alan Goff's Avatar
    Well i am Win user for ~20y and i can confirm all these problems with NT
    Except the kernel has nothing to do with this supposed problems with Windows.
    11-28-2014 09:17 AM
  6. Michael Alan Goff's Avatar
    WP already use the NT kernel, since 8.0.

    Windows 10 doesn't bring anything new. For the desktop is just Windows 7 with tiles, for mobile is just a refreshed UI. Universal apps are here since 8.1 but nobody is writing apps for the platform.

    So, Windows is dead in the consumer market, and Windows 10 won't change anything.

    Sent from my GeForce7050M-M using Tapatalk
    Wrong. Windows 10 it's about further uniting the code bases. It doesn't just refresh the UI, there are some big changes underlying it.
    11-28-2014 09:19 AM
  7. runamuck83's Avatar
    Wow... You're clueless. Every windows since NT has run on the NT kernel. Yes, even windows 7
    11-28-2014 09:20 AM
  8. rodan01's Avatar
    Wrong. Windows 10 it's about further uniting the code bases. It doesn't just refresh the UI, there are some big changes underlying it.

    Windows Phone 8.1 implements 90% of the Windows 8.1 APIs, the unification is already done.
    11-28-2014 09:28 AM
  9. a5cent's Avatar
    There's something that bugs me. I don't get the whole excitement and buzz around this thing - one Windows kernel on all form factors and devices, having in mind that the NT kernel is known for its bugs, unreliability, viruses and malware attacks, exploits, unreasonable crashes, freezes, slow work, driver issues and overall problems since ages. For almost 20 years Windows NT is target of endless jokes and well-grounded anti-comments by the whole world... Seriously, why the excitement.
    You misunderstand what the kernel is. There is no clear definition of what exactly is part of the kernel and what isn't. Even within MS, engineers will often use the term differently. However, most of us consumers, on sites such as this, understand the kernel to be something vastly different from what anybody at MS considers it to be. For this reason, whenever MS mentions the kernel, most consumers tend to misunderstand what is being said.

    The topmost image on this Wikipedia page provides a very high level overview of the Windows architecture. The part coloured purple represents what engineers at MS generally consider to be the kernel. Although that area may seem to represent a large part of the overall OS , that entire purple area is contained (for the most part) in just three files:

    ntoskrnl.exe (7 MB on disk)
    hal.dll (0.5 MB on disk)
    ntdll.dll (1.5MB on disk)

    The mentioned file sizes are rough approximations for a Windows 8.1 installation. Considering that Windows 8.1 is a 10GB or 13GB install (for 32bit and 64bit versions), those three files actually comprise a very small part of the entire OS. About 0.07%! Although not entirely correct, from a user's point of view, it would probably be best to think of the kernel as a device driver for their motherboard+CPU. Nothing more!

    My point is that literally none of the problems you've raised have anything to do with the kernel! Considering how small and focused the kernel is, it shouldn't be hard to imagine that the majority of issues will tend to reside elsewhere. When MS says that all versions of Windows share the same kernel, it's only that 0.07% of Windows that they are referring to. Not even for developers is that (directly) of much consequence. For users it's practically meaningless, but nevertheless, we do tend to make a big fuss over it around these parts. Like I said, mostly due to not understanding what it actually is.

    You want your phones, tablets, xboxes, etc. to be like your PC? And I'm not just talking about Windows 10 on these devices,?
    I don't. I suspect almost nobody else does either. That is also not what MS aims to achieve! In addition to the kernel, and a few other small bits and pieces, the only other large and shared component that goes into making a Windows Phone is the WinRT API and runtime. This is a larger piece of software logic, but still only of moderate size compared to the rest of Windows. A few hundred megabytes. All those things combined still get us nowhere close to being a desktop Windows OS, which is where all the problems you've mentioned are encountered.

    just look at WP8 already.. resuming/loading screens, slow work so on and so forth. Windows CE was kind of stable. That's why the only stable OS with the name Windows was actually WP7 (and previous work). Thoughts?
    This is the only accusation you've made that I think is valid. I agree that W7 was both faster and more reliable than W8.x. W7 also felt more responsive, despite running on the single-core hardware of the day. Though I don't recall that W7 was any better in terms of how often we encountered the resuming/loading screens. That's just my gut feeling though. I have no empirical data to back that up with.

    Anyway, none of that is surprising considering Windows CE is a real-time OS. A part of me wishes MS had stayed with Windows CE, but I do understand why it made sense to change. I hope that over time MS will improve the OS, so we can eventually return to the efficiency of WP7.
    Last edited by a5cent; 12-14-2014 at 02:23 PM. Reason: spelling
    12-01-2014 01:17 AM
  10. marratj's Avatar
    Still, WP 8.0 wasn't anywhere near as bad as WP 8.1 when it comes to Resuming... screens. Especially on the older hardware of my 1020 8.0 was much more responsive.
    12-01-2014 01:38 AM
  11. a5cent's Avatar
    ^ It's not that simple. It also depends on what device you have. Many people report that with WP8.1 installed on both their L920 and L830, they see the resuming screen a lot less frequently on the later. Whatever the problem is, it appears to be about more than just the OS version. On my L830 with Denim I'd say I see the resuming screen only rarely. When I do see the resuming screen, it is visible for only very short periods of time.. usually less than two seconds.
    Last edited by a5cent; 12-01-2014 at 02:33 AM. Reason: spelling
    Laura Knotek likes this.
    12-01-2014 01:45 AM
  12. wpcontinue's Avatar
    You misunderstand what the kernel is. There is no clear definition of what exactly is part of the kernel and what isn't. Even within MS, engineers will often use the term differently. However, most of us consumers, on sites such as this, understand the kernel to be something vastly different from what anybody at MS considers it to be. For this reason, whenever MS mentions the kernel, most consumers tend to misunderstand what is being said.

    The topmost image on this Wikipedia page provides a very high level overview of the Windows architecture. The part coloured purple represents what engineers at MS generally consider to be the kernel. Although that area may seem to represent a large part of the overall OS , that entire purple area is contained (for the most part) in just three files:

    ntoskrnl.exe (7 MB on disk)
    hal.dll (0.5 MB on disk)
    ntdll.dll (1.5MB on disk)

    The mentioned file sizes are rough approximations for a Windows 8.1 installation. Considering that Windows 8.1 is a 10GB or 13GB install (for 32bit and 64bit versions), those three files actually comprise a very small part of the entire OS. About 0.07%! Although not entirely correct, from a user's point of view, it would probably be best to think of the kernel as a device driver for your motherboard. Nothing more!

    My point is that literally none of the problems you've raised have anything to do with the kernel! Considering how small and focused the kernel is, it shouldn't be hard to imagine that the majority of issues will tend to reside elsewhere. When MS says that all versions of Windows share the same kernel, it's only that 0.07% of Windows that they are referring to. Not even for developers is that (directly) of much consequence. For users it's practically meaningless, but nevertheless, we do tend to make a big fuss over it around these parts. Like I said, mostly due to not understanding what it actually is.



    I don't. I suspect almost nobody else does either. That is also not what MS aims to achieve! In addition to the kernel, and a few other small bits and pieces, the only other large and shared component that goes into making a Windows Phone is the WinRT API and runtime. This is a larger piece of software logic, but still only of moderate size compared to the rest of Windows. A few hundred megabytes. All those things combined still get us nowhere close to being a desktop Windows OS, which is where all the problems you've mentioned are encountered.



    This is the only accusation you've made that I think is valid. I agree that W7 was both faster and more reliable than W8.x. W7 also felt more responsive, despite running on the single-core hardware of the day. Though I don't recall that W7 was any better in terms of how often we encountered the resuming/loading screens. That's just my gut feeling though. I have no empirical data to back that up with.

    Anyway, none of that is surprising considering Windows CE is a real-time OS. Parts of me wish MS had stayed with Windows CE, but I do understand why it made sense to change. I hope that over time MS will improve the OS, so we can eventually return to the efficiency of WP7.
    Best comment
    12-01-2014 03:25 AM
  13. Squachy's Avatar
    As far as I know CE was smaller and lighter, because it was based on the older 16bit kernel of windows 95/98/ME which has long since died when WindowsXP came along and took the OS to NT.
    12-01-2014 10:46 PM
  14. a5cent's Avatar
    As far as I know CE was smaller and lighter, because it was based on the older 16bit kernel of windows 95/98/ME which has long since died when WindowsXP came along and took the OS to NT.
    No. CE is a real-time OS. That mandates it's own specially designed kernel and libraries. None of MS' desktop OSes, past or present, provide that capability. It never had anything to do with 95/98/ME or XP.

    The modern version of CE, Windows Embedded Compact 2013, is still just as light and efficient, runs on a broader range of hardware than WP/NT ever could, and supports up to 256 cores... more than the NT kernel. Contrary to popular belief, it's not outdated. It's just not used in electronics that consumers are aware of or typically think about.

    I wouldn't be surprised if Windows Embedded Compact was used as a basis for Microsoft's band.
    Laura Knotek likes this.
    12-02-2014 12:09 AM
  15. Michael Alan Goff's Avatar
    No. CE is a real-time OS. That mandates it's own specially designed kernel and libraries. None of MS' desktop OSes, past or present, provide that capability. It never had anything to do with 95/98/ME or XP.

    The modern version of CE, Windows Embedded Compact 2013, is still just as light and efficient, runs on a broader range of hardware than WP/NT ever could, and supports up to 256 cores... more than the NT kernel. Contrary to popular belief, it's not outdated. It's just not used in electronics that consumers are aware of or typically think about.

    I wouldn't be surprised if Windows Embedded Compact was used as a basis for Microsoft's band.
    If that's the case, wouldn't it have been better to modernize the CE kernel and quietly switch the desktop to that.
    12-02-2014 01:39 PM
  16. a5cent's Avatar
    If that's the case, wouldn't it have been better to modernize the CE kernel and quietly switch the desktop to that.
    No. It's not mere coincidence that there is no such thing as a RT desktop OS. RTOSes have their benefits, but they also have limitations that you don't want to deal with in desktop and server environments. That's part of the reason why CE could never have supported the entire .net runtime. As with everything in engineering, you must choose which properties are most important for your use-case and sacrifice others as a result. That we can't simultaneously optimize all desirable properties in a given system is an engineering law of nature.

    MS had to chose between keeping WP on a RTOS and sacrificing unification, or visa versa. They chose the later.
    12-02-2014 01:57 PM
  17. vlad0's Avatar
    It's just that some people don't believe everything that is written on the Internet

    NT kernel is stable, fairly fast, well designed, and many issues with it are a problem of uneducated user.
    Granted Microsoft have done an outstanding job in modernizing the NT kernel, but it was not designed for mobile/battery powered devices from the very beginning, which will always show.. maybe one day we will have batteries and hardware powerful enough to where it won't matter, but for now Windows NT is not ideal for mobile.

    The same can be said about UNIX, Linux, and all of their derivatives .. all made for machines that are plugged into a power grid.

    There is only one legit mobile OS that was built for mobile devices from the ground up and that is Symbian..

    We could also add Windows CE here.. it was meant for battery powered stuff but still inferior to EPOC at the time.

    WinCE's code name was Pegasus btw .. this is a nice read

    The History of Microsoft Windows CE - Windows CE 1.0x - HPC Factor
    12-12-2014 06:59 PM
  18. Michael Alan Goff's Avatar
    Granted Microsoft have done an outstanding job in modernizing the NT kernel, but it was not designed for mobile/battery powered devices from the very beginning, which will always show.. maybe one day we will have batteries and hardware powerful enough to where it won't matter, but for now Windows NT is not ideal for mobile.

    The same can be said about UNIX, Linux, and all of their derivatives .. all made for machines that are plugged into a power grid.

    There is only one legit mobile OS that was built for mobile devices from the ground up and that is Symbian..

    We could also add Windows CE here.. it was meant for battery powered stuff but still inferior to EPOC at the time.

    WinCE's code name was Pegasus btw .. this is a nice read

    The History of Microsoft Windows CE - Windows CE 1.0x - HPC Factor
    How is it not ideal for mobile? Windows Phone runs fantastically.
    TechAbstract likes this.
    12-13-2014 09:30 PM

Similar Threads

  1. Mountain Biking with the Microsoft Band (How-to Explained)
    By gwh34t in forum Microsoft Band & Band 2
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-21-2015, 02:37 AM
  2. [L535] Upgradable to windows 10?
    By Windows Central Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-28-2014, 11:00 AM
  3. Why am I not able to download music from Mix radio?
    By Windows Central Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-28-2014, 01:51 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-27-2014, 08:33 PM
  5. BES12 makes it even easier to activate a Windows Phone on an BlackBerry Enterprise Server network
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-27-2014, 08:30 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD