60% Of Windows Vista Code To Be Rewritten

Alien54 writes "Up to 60% of the code in the new consumer version of Microsoft new Vista operating system is set to be rewritten as the Company "scrambles" to fix internal problems, according to this report. In an effort to meet a deadline of the 2007 CES show in Las Vegas Microsoft has pulled programmers from the highly succesful Xbox team to help resolve many problems associated with entertainment and media centre functionality inside the OS. Much more at the link."

Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly

Ok, we all know how the majority of Slashdot feels about Microsoft. It's not a positive feeling. I myself don't like them.

But please don't use this 60% figure as proof that Vista will suck. Because it doesn't necessarily mean that.

Once again, we have the Slashdot spin to deal with:

Up to 60% of the code in the new consumer version of Microsoft new Vista operating system is set to be rewritten as the Company "scrambles" to fix internal problems, according to this report.

Scrambling to fix problems? If they're saying their release date is sometime in 2007, I don't think they need to scramble. They actually seem pretty lax about when this is going to be released. Hell, I heard about Longhorn years ago and they sure haven't been "scrambling" to do anything with that. Stop making it sound like Microsoft is running around with their heads cut off. Because I highly doubt it.

I interpret this to mean that Microsoft is stepping up to the plate and taking responsibility. They have identified so many problems that it needs major revision and good for them.

Do you remember Windows 98, first edition? Do remember how much better second edition was? I do. Why the hell they didn't just wait on the release is simple. Money.

They could release Vista prematurely but now we wait until 2007. And if you hate Windows, like I do, why do you care? We're still going to be using Linux anyways.

So please, look at this move as a gesture to try and release a quality product and not slop out some POS OS that they are only releasing for the sake of income.

Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly

Heck... let's make it 95% to 100% and I will consider going back to Windows!

Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly

Actually I wonder which half is being re-written?
Legacy code causing issues, so they re-write it, thus Vista is essentially a clean new windows? Or is is the new stuff not working, which means that there is even less reason to pugrade from XP? Which half is bad really does matter in this case (at least to me it does).
-nB

Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly

you misspelled pugrade. Its poo-grade.

poo-grade: n. 1 a collection of one or more system software packages mostly comprised of poo. 2. shit on a disk. Usage I've downloaded our poo-grade and it is ready to install.

poo-grade: v. 1. the act of replacing existing system poo with new and improved system poo. Usage: It is time to poo-grade the main file server, please back up your shit. Thanks, sincerely BOFH.

Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly

How about they just use a working kernel like say linux, something from a bsd, etc.

Generally speaking, the Windows NT Kernel is a superb piece of code. The problems come in when Microsoft abuses the kernel rather than working with it. The fact that everything runs with Administrator permissions (because all the users run as administrators) is not the original intent of the kernel. Windows Terminal Server Systems tend to be a little more on track, as they default deny administrator privleges to regular users. Unfortunately, they also feel extremely unweildly due to the lack of SUDO-type permission elevation, and the fact that individual desktops are only partly separated from each other. (e.g. Installing new programs is often just as hard as on Unix X Sessions. Many programs don't allow you to install for only one user.)

Re:It's superb because it's VMS in disguise.

David Cutler (project lead for DEC VMS and RSX11) walked out of DEC when management canceled the x86 VMS port.

It wasn't an x86 port. It was a brand new RISC architecture with a complex new version of VMS. The project was called Parallel Reduced Instruction Set Machine, or PRISM for short.

Supposedly he took the VMS (PRISM) source with him

Actually, it was slightly less illegal than that. Cutler took his entire team with him as a condition for working for Microsoft. They then proceded to redo much of the software work they'd done on PRISM. As you mentioned previously, Digital sued, but ended up settling on the condition that Windows NT be ported to the Alpha. (Fat lot of good that did.)

it was adapted to run DOS and OS/2 applications

I forget the exact terminology, but the kernel has pluggable "personalities" that allow it to function with different user modes attached. There is a decent Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] on its architecture.

Did anyone actually READ the article?

Now, I must preface this with the disclaimer that I myself prefer operating systems other than Windows. However, this is not an attempt to flame; by all means use what works best for you.

With that said, did anyone actually read the entirety of the article?

To be fair to Microsoft, this article was more than slightly misleading - and for that matter, contains little information relevant to its headline. The only mention about rewriting two thirds of Vista's codebase is in the headline and in the subheading that directly follows it. Whether informed by "an insider at Microsoft" or otherwise, there is simply not enough solid information to comment upon, let alone fill an entire slashdot thread with baseless conjecture.

We're all hoping for an improved operating system from Microsoft. God knows it would make my job many magnitudes easier without having to deal with the joys of insecure machines.

But please, withhold judgement until we receive a finished product.

Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly

I'd rather they wait and get it right before releasing Vista rather than going through the excruciating process of installing security updates/service packs/second editions on a hastily released product. Or even better yet, having to go out and spend money on security software to fix the holes that shouldn't exist in the first place. Please get this one right Microsoft.

The Mythical Man Month.

A good book and it discusses how adding MORE programmers to a task means the project will take LONGER to complete.

So, adding more programmers to a late project, and not slipping the date even more to account for them, [b]probably[/b] means that the final result [b]will[/b] suck.

Re:The Mythical Man Month.

Hence the expression "9 women can't have a baby in 1 month."

Re:The Mythical Man Month.

There's a quote in "The Bluffers Guide To Maths" that say

If a five-piece jazz band can play 'Honeysuckle Rose' in six minutes, you might think a ten-piece could play it in three minutes. In fact, it would take at least 12, because everybody's got to have time to take a solo

Re:The Mythical Man Month.

In any given project there are just so many parallel tasks. The optimum number of developers is about the same as that level of parallelism (plus a secretary and a manager). It allows compartmentalizing things, so each developer has a chance to become an expert in that area and be productive. Adding more developers just increases communication overhead, training overhead, petty squabbles, micromanagement of the mess, etc. Taking away developers leaves holes that will require additional time to complete.

I hope the article summary is wrong and that Microsoft isn't so incompetent as to substantially re-write an operating system in the last year of its development! Talk about a death spiral.

"That's no moon, it's the accumulated mass of all our new bugs!"

Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly

I agree with you mostly, but I swear I remember reading an article a couple of years ago where Allchin (sp?) commented that Vista was a from-scratch complete re-write of the OS, that they didn't port anything over. Of course I could be mistaken, but it just sounds really weird to remember that, and now the talk of a major re-write. 10%, 25%, 50%; does it really matter how much of a re-write it is? At 50+ million lines of code that's no small re-write. And I assume everyone here on /. has at the very least worked on small to medium-sized project development teams. You all know the difficulties and politics in teams of that size. Can you imagine the cluster-fuck in coordinating development using literally hundreds and hundreds of programmer?

Personally, I really don't care when it comes out. I waited until sp2 to jump on the xp bandwagon anyway, and I typically wait a couple of years before adopting a new operating system, just to let the bugs shake out.

Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly

To me, it means that Allchin was probably bending the truth a bit for PR reasons. Given how many different departments and groups there are within Microsoft, I'm sure there have been numerous instances of someone saying "we can't rewrite that from scratch; we'd have to start everything we're working on over from scratch too!" And so they port a little code here, a little code there... a big piece of code here, a bigger piece of code there...

Given what we know is in Vista, it doesn't make much sense for the entirety to be rewritten. Why would they choose to recode the Registry and then follow through on actually including it? Similarly, look how many things are being backported to XP, and easily at that -- that doesn't sound like Vista is "all new" to me. But it appears that by NOT doing what Allchin said they were going to do, they now get to "scramble" and rewrite tons of code. I'm sure that's significantly less efficient than simply starting from scratch in the first place.

Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly

It's Slashdot spin, because people read the "up to 60%" and they hear "60%".

In fact, you'll notice the submitter and/or editors did exactly that - they took the "up to 60%" in the article, and changed it to "60%" in the headline.

In fact, "up to" means any number equal to or smaller than. So the actual amount of code rewritten could be 0%. It would also be accurate to say that the code is being rewritten entirely "up to 9 times", because that "up to" would include scenarios where the code was not re-written at all.

It's spin, plain as day.

Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly

I don't think they need to scramble.

Are you kidding?

Let's put aside the possibity that the 60% figure is probably total hogwash, because that's not what you're arguing.

Rewriting over half the code of a project that you've spent years working on and are supposed to release in about a year is a desperate situation. It's not possible to acomplish. If they said they had to rewrite 10% of the code, I'd say they were in a bad situation, since that last 10% of the code often takes the most time.

I don't believe the 60% figure, because if it were true, the project leaders would be looking for new jobs already.

Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly

Hell, I heard about Longhorn years ago and they sure haven't been "scrambling" to do anything with that.

Clearly. This was supposed to have been Longhorn by now, wasn't it?

Stop making it sound like Microsoft is running around with their heads cut off. Because I highly doubt it.

They've been announcing later release dates, fewer features, delays in their Office suite, and god knows what else.

When a critical security bug is found in IE6, and then immediately found in the supposedly completely redesigned IE7, it gives one pause for concern.

It is beiginning to seem that Microsoft is becoming a victim of their own intertia. They built a huge, overly complicated beast, based entirely off proprietary technologies of dubious value. They've been promising the moon for years, and now they're starting to promise the next county because the moon is unobtainable.

So please, look at this move as a gesture to try and release a quality product and not slop out some POS OS that they are only releasing for the sake of income.

I asked this yesterday in another thread, but I never got an answer ... given all of the features they've announced wouldn't be in Vista, WHAT is it, if NOT a release for the sake of income? Except for a new whiz-bang interface, I haven't really heard what compelling features Vista is supposed to have. From what I can tell, they're removing some of the suck, and a few incremental improvements, what motivates me as a consumer to want it?

Certainly all of those shiny Longhorn features they touted have been dropped from it. It sounds like it's a minor evolutionary upgrade to Windows at best. Hardly the Earth shattering, Next New Thing they've touted it as being.

And in the mean time, people might just decide to buy a Mac.

Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly

From what I can tell, they're removing some of the suck, and a few incremental improvements, what motivates me as a consumer to want it?

The truly sad part is that it doesn't matter, because they're going to sell millions of units anyway. Every single new Dell sold in 2008+, and every computer at companies that uses Windows desktops (which is almost all of them) is going to have Vista installed on them, and Microsoft is going to be paid for every one of those copies.

Just because no one will go out and purchase a $400 upgrade from a Best Buy shelf doesn't mean Microsoft isn't going to sell any. They have a captive audience. For the majority of the world, Microsoft Windows is inseparable from the computer. (I realise this sentiment is not true on Slashdot, but the people who read this site are of a slightly different breed.) Telling people they can buy a computer without an operating system, and that they can install their own, is like telling people they can go buy a car without an engine, and then download a free one from the internet. Even if it's technically possible, it doesn't even occur to them. And as for MacOSX: most people who buy Dells are looking for the equivalent of a Honda Civic. A Mac is like buying a BMW.

And keep in mind that we (of the Slashdot kind) have been beating into people for years the need to keep their Windows machines all patched and updated. Well, isn't Vista just an update? Of course they will upgrade; their data needs to be protected from the evil identity thieves and hackers lurking in the intarweb!

In short, Vista will be everywhere as soon as Microsoft releases it, whether it's better than XP or not. And they're going to make a bundle.

Re:Please Don't Interpret this Incorrectly

I asked this yesterday in another thread, but I never got an answer ... given all of the features they've announced wouldn't be in Vista, WHAT is it, if NOT a release for the sake of income? Except for a new whiz-bang interface, I haven't really heard what compelling features Vista is supposed to have. From what I can tell, they're removing some of the suck, and a few incremental improvements, what motivates me as a consumer to want it?

I've heard that MS is putting a lot of effort into the idea of running all applications as normal, restricted users. Up til now, many legacy (and not-so-legacy) applications had to be run with power user or adminstratrator on XP because they expected to be able to write to Program Files or even to the windows system directory. I understand that Vista will have a very sophisticated virtual file system layer (talk about a kludge) that will virtualize some of these areas of the disk for these bad applications so that they can still function. The app will think it is writing to the windows sytem directory or the Program Files area when if fact it is not. On one hand this seems to me to be a pretty brilliant solution to the crappy legacy app problem, but on the other hand seems to be a horrible hack.

Cairo?

Hell, I heard about Longhorn years ago and they sure haven't been "scrambling" to do anything with that.

I first heard about Longhorn under another name, in the early 90s when it was called Cairo. Take a look at the "feature list" of that vaporware sometime. Then recall that the feature list was in response to OS/2's actual features, that existed in 93...

How far we haven't come in 14 years.

BTW, take a look at the original feature list for Longhorn, and the current list. It's interesting too. And we're now 2 years later than the original "Longhorn" date, and only 14 years past Cairo.

The reason it's problematic

What you need to remember is that Windows is the largest software product ever created, when measured in lines of code. Bigger than the previous record holder, IBM's MVS. Bigger than the Star Wars missile shield defense software that nobody could ever get to work.

Specifically, Vista is 50 million lines of code (Mloc). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_lines_of_code [wikipedia.org]

To compare, RedHat 7 was only 30 Mloc, including sendmail, Apache, and so on. So saying Microsoft are going to rewrite 60% of Vista by January, is like saying they could start now and have the whole of RedHat 7 completely rewritten by January.

Or to pick another data point: it's like saying Microsoft are going to start from scratch now, and write another Windows NT 5.0 by January, and have plenty of time for debugging--because NT 5.0 was only 20 Mloc.

Now do you see why software engineers reading the announcement are more than a little skeptical?

If it's really true that they need to rewrite 60% of Vista, then my professional opinion is that there's absolutely no way in hell they'll have something good enough to ship in 2007.

Even if it's out by a factor of 2 or 3, they're still in big trouble. The original Windows NT was only 4 Mloc, and there was a 5 year gap between Windows 95 and the actual release of NT.

Re:Or....

Windows 95 was the start of the tree.. many of you put down 98 gold but it was better than 95 was. 98 SE was better sometimes, but the "support" for IRQ's managing themselves caused me a lot of headaches with soundblaster 64 cards, via chipsets and ati rage graphics! Aside from Windows ME, every Windows release since 95 got better in my opinion. 95, NT4, 98, 98se, Windows 2000, Windows ME (sucked), Windows XP...

Of course Vista will suck, they are messing with the kernel. XP was not a huge difference from Windows 2000 and so we're use to a "stable" release of windows (for windows anyway). I'll probably adopt Vista anyway when its released on my Windows machine with a dual boot or legacy install of XP so I can still game. Most likely everyone else will adopt vista as well. Which means we are stuck with it anyway. As much as most of us wish for Linux, OSX or something else to replace windows, its not happening on the desktop. Even keeping an old version of windows, helps keep windows strong. Why? Software will still be written for XP and Vista anyway. .NET 2 runs on both so you can imagine that an app may run on both. Thats how microsoft keeps going. If you hate it so much, start running another os exclusively, write software to replace everything windows has and maybe you'll get lucky. Lets face it, Linux is missing some key software areas like Tax Preperation software (finance in general), games, Itunes compatible players (even if its illegal in US), etc. End users need to migrate what they use over to a new os and if they can't, they won't switch. The Windows to Mac transition is easier but has its own problems. You can get quicken, and WoW runs fine, but if you use rhapsody, ms access, .NET apps, etc you're in for a rough ride. I'm also a mac user and I'm never able to ditch windows because I like to game, write software and websites. I need to test websites in IE, I actually like to code in .NET, and games like Half life, DODS, CSS, most star trek games, and many old games only run in windows. As long as we need windows, consumers will want it.

In terms of stable, you need to define a baseline. I'm sure Vista will run better than Mac OS 9 ever did. It will run better than Windows 3.1 did and certainly better than 95 ever did. The standard is at least what people can remember and right now that means XP, 2000, ME, Linux 2.2-2.6, Mac OS 10.0-10.4. My opinion is that all operating systems suck right now. Read the changelog for the latest linux kernel.. time went backwards for christ sake! FreeBSD 6.1 beta's todo list is scary and most of those terrible bugs go back to at least 5.3. Mac OS 10.4 is a piece of shit even release. (all even releases of OS X are less stable than odd releases and often introduce more features) I've had to reinstall OS X several times on my laptop since it came out and on machines at work that I have to administer. People expect bugs. They don't expect blue screens anymore, but serious bugs are ok. Lets all raise our standards and then we can expect more!

60%?

I've scanned TFA an ungodly three times: “60%” occurs in the title and summary, but nowhere else; can anyone divine its provenance? I'd wager it hails from the statistical nether-æther of sensationalist journalism.

That said, I think there's trouble brewing for any company that chants “innovation” like some apotropaïc mantra: you have it or you don't (and it tends to go hand in hand with testosterone).

Come on

When has Smarthouse.com.au steered you wrong in the past????

Seriously, some of the shit that gets posted on Slashdot is the geek equivelant of a tabloid.

Re:Come on

When has Smarthouse.com.au steered you wrong in the past????

Never. Not one single time. Who the fuck is smarthouse.com.au?

Re:Come on

Slashdot is the geek equivelant of a tabloid.

This is simply not true.

If Slashdot were like a tabloid, we'd have poorly written diatribes everywhere and a picture of a naked woman on Page 2.

Cowboy Neal, I'm waiting for Page 2.

Re:Come on

...we'd have poorly written diatribes everywhere and a picture of a naked woman on Page 2.
Cowboy Neal, I'm waiting for Page 2.

Please Dear God may I not find a picture of a naked Cowboy Neal on page 2 tomorrow.

Perhaps...

But to be worrying about 60% of the code in a one year timeframe, in light of the 10's of millions of lines of code...

If they're actually doing this (I've my doubts...), then Vista won't be out when they say it will be- it'll be delayed by another 2 or so years like Windows 95 ended up being (95 was started approximately 4 years earlier and was only supposed to take a year, year and a half to do- the delays were so bad that the press was making all blow and no go jokes with respect to the codename for the product, "Chicago".).

Wow! 60%??!!

That's a lot of GoTo statements!!!

Re:Wow! 60%??!!

That's what they get for giving it to their "goto guy".

Apple, "MacOS W", & the real reason for the de

The real reason for the delay is an event that occurred this Tuesday, which was written up by an Apple Insider [macrumors.com] in the famous MacRumors forums. I quote the post below in full. My comments are at the end.

The board meeting

So it's Tuesday morning at Apple. The boardroom is having another meeting about the future of the Macintosh. They're perusing the feedback over the unofficial port of Windows to the Mac, and considering the consequences. There's a whole bunch of things on the agenda. OS development is hard, and it's expensive. Their competitors, Sony and Lenevo, doesn't need to do it, and they're doing pretty well all in all. Plus, there's the whole break up plan. When Apple separates into Apple Macintosh Inc and iTunes Corp, how attractive will Apple Macintosh be as a take-over target? The whole move to Intel will be for naught if it hasn't made Dell and friends just a little more excited and comfortable they could fit the Macintosh into their lines.

Apple has some little development projects on the boil and has for some time. To begin with, it's pretty much completely reimplemented the Carbon APIs under Windows. Indeed, that's how iTunes and Quicktime are implemented. But, interestingly, so are the Cocoa APIs. They're all there, Apple never stopped developing them, even after it nixed WebObjects for that platform. It's also in need of certain features that would help it with the future. Apple has no "managed code" environment - it supported Java to a certain extent, but Cocoa never was a perfect fit for that. Apple's progress with .NET, unofficially, under Windows and OS X, is coming along surprisingly well.

As time has gone on, the notion of switching to Windows as the base platform really has gotten more and more plausable. There are still roadblocks, Apple needs Microsoft to provide them with a little more customizability of the UI. A switch to Windows without providing the essential Macintosh experience just wouldn't do. But, well, .NET, and Aero, are Microsoft's attempts to break with the past. Perhaps an OS built upon these APIs could, with Microsoft's help, look entirely like a Mac environment - with the right code, obviously. You don't want a Dell user flipping a registry switch and getting a Mac.

It's clear that whatever happens, OS X is doomed. Postings by MacRumors alumni arguing that the porting of Windows to the Mac spells disaster are read out, and largely agreed with. But the question then is - does Apple continue to pour money into OS X, or could Gates and Ballmer be ameanable to making the modifications needed to make Windows Vista the next Macintosh OS?

The phone call

Jobs picks up the phone and calls Gates. There's a brief discussion, and then the phone's put down. A few minutes later, the phone rings. It's Ballmer, Gates, and Allchin.

"We think we can do it, Steve" says Bill Gates. "I mean, this is a major thing for us. It's a coup, and I know you know we're thinking it. So we're going to help in any way we can."

Allchin interjects: "Funnily enough, from our end, the code's largely there. We need a bit more time. WinFS needs some work - we'd put it on hold, but if you're going to want Spotlight on this OS, we'll need to finish it. Sticking menus at the top of the screen and reordering them... that's easy stuff. We'd appreciate it if you ported your own Dock and Finder, you can keep that proprietary if you want."

Jobs smiles. "That's perfect for us. Means we keep control over the so-called Macintosh experience. That's really the only reason we've stuck with our own operating systems for so long."

Ballmer speaks next. "Well, I'm looking at the timings, we can probably get things to you in a service pack for Vista, perhaps in April or May of 2007?"

"January", says Jobs. "It's got to be January. I want to go to MacWorld, and announce a new operating system, Mac OS W, th

Re:Apple, "MacOS W", & the real reason for the

Darn it, I read this post without my tinfoil accessories. [lessemf.com]

--Joe

Re:Apple, "MacOS W", & the real reason for the

Let's see... if true, this would mean that consumers would get a double benefit - they would pay MORE for an Apple PC than a non-Apple PC AND (drumroll, please!) they would get to use "quality" Microsoft software on this PC!

If true, let me tell you what over 90% of the consumers out there would say. These are the people who are not Apple fanboys. "You seriously expect me to pay MORE for an Apple PC than a non-Apple PC just to run Windows?!? When both PCs will run it? Are you out of your freakin' mind?!?" And Apple soon joins DEC in the computer afterlife.

Re:Apple, "MacOS W", & the real reason for the

Nicely written story. But there's one major flaw that makes it entirely unbelievable.

No airborne chairs.

Third Rule of Software Development

Always add gaming programmers late in the project and to improve security and reliability.

Re:Third Rule of Software Development

Always add gaming programmers late in the project and to improve security and reliability.

Of course. For example, the programmers of FPS games are likely good at writing AI which fights against the user. Just the thing you need for a secure OS, because you know, the biggest security problem often sits in front of the screen.

manpower

In an effort to meet a deadline of the 2007 CES show in Las Vegas Microsoft has pulled programmers from the highly succesful Xbox team to help resolve many problems associated with entertainment and media centre functionality inside the OS.

"Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later." - Fred Brooks, The Mythical Man-Month

What is it, Bash Microsoft Day at the press core?

Wow, does it suck to be Microsoft today... just look at the homepage of Slashdot:

• 60% of Windows Vista Code to be Rewritten [slashdot.org]
• Forbes Says Vista Not People Ready [slashdot.org] (do people really run Windows? I thought it was more for computers... kidding...)
• Office Delayed, Too [slashdot.org] (Why was the title of this article "Too" when it was posted before the Windows delay articles???)
• Highly Critical Hole Found in IE [slashdot.org]

The hits just keep coming... I'm no Microsoft supporter, but that's a lot of bad PR for any company in one day - makes you feel sorry for them.

I wonder if all this negative press will affect their stock price [yahoo.com] in trading today. (Makes you feel sorry for their shareholders!)

Better late than broken

I wonder if all this negative press will affect their stock price [yahoo.com] in trading today

Not as much as if Vista was released and immediately barfed and/or succumbed to massive virus infection out of the box...

If I were waiting on Vista I'd be annoyed that it wasn't out, but then if I was such as big MS Software user then XP would still likely be doing ok for me, although lacking improved 64-bit/dual-core support. If I got a bunch of Vista machines that immediately started crashing or were infected in the new few weeks, I'd be a lot more pissed than annoyed.

I'd say taking the time to fix things is not a bad plan, and 60% sounds like BS to me. As the article seems to focus a lot on multimedia components it could be that 60% of the multimedia core needs revamping.

classic managment mistake

When you run into a large issue, you don't pull people off another project to help.

It's like getting 3 women pregnant so you can have a baby in 3 months.

You need to define your new schedule and stick to that. otherwise you end up with a slower schedule and a different set of bugs.

Am I the only one...?

Microsoft has pulled programmers from the highly succesful Xbox team to help resolve many problems associated with entertainment and media centre functionality inside the OS.

Am I the only one who thinks that things like media and entertainment should not be core parts of an OS, but rather should be handled by applications that run on the OS? We're not buying a television, after all.

Slow news day?

Microsoft is pulling some staff from an finished project and assigning them to an unfinished project...targeting a similar market, no less...

Brilliant!

60% Is NOT IN THE ARTICLE

Go ahead. Do a find on the page. The only place where the number 60 is even in there is in the article's title and in a link back to the SAME article at the bottom of the page.

In fact, this 60% number is made up. Not only would this be impossible in less than a year, 60% of the code in Vista isn't even new to Vista.

Hey Slashdot editors... I know you guys are really into MS bashing and you want to satisfy the thirst that most Slashdotters have for MS blood, but at least check to make sure that articles your posting have a shred of truth in them.

So what?

Shut up, fools, 99+% of you are going to end up using Vista anyway.

Re:So what?

Shut up, fools, 99+% of you are going to end up using Vista anyway.

I think you'll find that the answer is merely 98.2%. Who's the fool NOW!!

Xbox code

Microsoft has pulled programmers from the highly succesful Xbox team to help resolve many problems associated with entertainment and media centre functionality inside the OS.

Xbox code in Vista! Think of the possibilites!!

When we get the Blue Screen of Death we can simply wait a few seconds and respawn somewhere nearby our original desktop.

We can use a Gameshark to hack ourselves more time or chances to get our work done.

We can whip out a plasma rifle from "Halo" to frag Clippy with.

It's because of WWDC

Apple moved this year's WWDC from July to August thus the need for Microsoft to delay & rewrite 60% of Vista so it can copy all the new geewhiz features of OS X 10.5 Leopard.

Anyone who disagrees with me is a Microsoft fanboy. ;)

Sounds like "Telephone"

Frankly, I doubt it. It sounds like something that mutated from either:

• 60% of modules require some change (as distinct from "rewritten") or
• 60% of <insert section> needs to be rewritten (as distinct from "Vista).

You can think as little as you like of Microsoft's management (and you'd have to go pretty low to match me) but I can't see even them being so flagrantly (stupid|dishonest) as to promise a 2007Q1 delivery of a 60% rewrite of something that took five years to get this far.

Sad, Bad Reporting!

I have been installing and testing Vista since the early betas. To the last one, build 5308. I have seen things getting better all along the way, from better graphics, speed and more reliability. It looked like a mess earlier, but then they cut features and made schedules more realistic.

Build 5308 is feature complete, and has not crashed even once. It supports all the devices on my machine. Now why the hell would they rewrite 60% of a perfectly well running system??? Microsoft has said that most of the work remaining is related to security and performance. I trust them, because I have seen it.

I read the article, I could not find the source of this information. The memo that was included does not speak about this 60% figure. They have not mentioned any other sources. Now why is this making news!!!??

so lets make a list..

1. Internet Explorer 7 still has major security issues that plague Internet Explorer 6

2. Microsoft Office is delayed

3. Vista is delayed.

4. Microsoft restructures the Windows division before a major OS release

5. Daniel Lyons from Forbes is underwhelmed with the Vista presentation and finds it complex and of little added value.

6. Microsoft elected not to utilize its .NET tools in developing bundled applications that will ship with Vista, instead opting for lower level languages that are more suspectible to security issues.

7. Throughout all of this, the security team at Microsoft decided to school Apple on security (I wonder if no one at Microsoft was paying attention?)

8. Businesses sold on the "Software Assurance" and other licensing gimmicks are getting very aggervated at was could be considered bait-and-switch (get SA, get updates .. oh wait, we don't have updates because we are delaying ALL of our major products..)

9. There is the possibility of major rewrites to Vista (though until it is confirmed by another source, I'll take it with a grain of salt..).

Interesting.

Not a "Meeee Toooo", or a nay-sayer

Folks,

Look at it this way: It takes major cojones [wikipedia.org] to admit to a huge re-write (especially if the re-writes involve core bits and pieces). This is particularly true when you're talking about a system of software that literally affects many tens of millions of computers worldwide.

Looking at it another way. If I'm going to have to use it (at work, that is), I'd rather it be very stable and transparent to my work. If it takes them five more years, that's fine with me. XP spanks the 9x Windows clan, and seems more stable than the Win2000 desktop versions I had to use at work.

The good news is that Vista's delay won't effect my music, my personal computer musings, or personal software development - I'm perfectly happy with various Linux distros, Solaris, and OSX... Windows is fine, my family does use it from time to time, and I'd like to see if Vista can maybe fuel some future competition for better OS software.

I have access the vista code!

It went from:

#import <WinXP.h>

WinXPApplyTheme(PRETTY_THEME);
WinXP RunLoop();

to:

#import <WinXP.h>

WinXPApplyTheme(PRETTIER_THEME); //To "Impact people" better
WinXPApplyPolicy(DISALLOW_GATOR); //For improved security
WinXPRunLoop(); // We're going to f___ing kill google!

Not Again

This would me MS's second try [slashdot.org] at a sucessor to the NT/2K/XP legacy. Best of luck - I'd rather see it late with the usual problems than 'ontime' and hopelessly broken.

Mini-microsoft also complained...

Mini-MSFT wrote an extensive rant about why the Microsoft execs should be fired [blogspot.com], and more interesting are the readers' responses.

I don't use osx but...

Apple could thrust one hell of a spear into the beast by releasing osx on standard intel now or very quickly. Yes it would be a frigging bold move but sometimes it takes a bold move when you want to make all the bucks. Yes of course drivers would be a big issue but I think that is a problem that could be solved also.

Wow. Nobody told me to rewrite my code.

As someone who works on Windows Media Center for Vista, I can certainly say that we're not rewriting a bunch of code. I'm using MCE for Vista on my living room PC right now.

60% of what?

help resolve many problems associated with entertainment and media centre functionality inside the OS

The way I read this, 60% of the code that implements the entertainment and media centre functionality needs a rewrite --- not 60% of Vista. This is much more consistent with the fact that the Vista Business Edition (whatever MS is actually calling it) is still on schedule to release this year. With this interpretation, 60% does not seem totally out of line. Heck, I'd vote for re-writing 100% of media Player if it was up to me!

MS is just stalling - to avoid the DOJ

The ONLY reason I can think that "Vista" has not been released yet is because the "probation" period of the DOJ settlement is due to expire (probably) in November 2007.

Microsoft is a maximum profits kind of company and Windows is one of their Cash Cows. If it wasn't due to the fact that until Nov 2007 they have to somewhat play by "fair" rules, there would have already been at least 1 newer version of windows, I mean it has been over 4 YEARS !

Microsoft is just playing the stall game to keep itself in the media, trying to keep the public view on Windows and not GNU/Linux or whatever. Mark my words, the next version of Windows (Vista) will be released mid-Nov 2007, just in time for Christmas 2007. And yes it will probably include their own media player, web browser, Anti-Virus, Anti-Spyware, Photo Editor, Desktop Search, Kitchen Sink, etc.

Sounds doubtful

A 60% Windows rewrite requires pushes the release date back only about another 3 months?

Re:Already covered and discussed on digg.com

http://digg.com/software/60_Of_Windows_Vista_Code_ To_Be_Rewritten

And yet we don't FSCKING care! If digg is do damned great, why are you here? Go back and play with the other digg idiots. Us Slashdot idiots don't want you here if the most constructive thing you can come up with is "We're already discussing it on digg". I'm sure it is being/has been discussed a lot of places online. Now we're discussing it on Slashdot. Get over it.

Karma be damned!

Re:Already covered and discussed on digg.com

Us Slashdot idiots don't want you here if the most constructive thing you can come up with is "We're already discussing it on digg".

It's "We Slashdot idiots."