Thread: sine curve representing Microsoft

  1. #16
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Quote Originally Posted by abachler View Post
    Im positive.
    But still wrong. Win2k is NT 5, XP is 5.1. There isn't really anything from 9x in 2k.
    All the buzzt!

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  2. #17
    Kernel hacker
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Farncombe, Surrey, England
    Quote Originally Posted by abachler View Post
    Im positive. 'Based on' could mean anything from completely dirivative work to 'we copy and pasted the idle thread to make the marketting people happy'. I suspect its more of the latter than the former. I agree with the original poster though, MS does seem to go through cycles of crap/gold/crap. Its not just their OS's its their compilers as well, 6.0 gold, 7.0 (2003) crap, 8.0 (2005) gold. The only problem I have with their newer compilers is they have their head up their ass and refused to impliment inline assembly for 64 bit applications. This is THE reason it is taking hardware companies so long to develop new drivers for 64 bit, since drivers are heavily coded in assembly. Linksys has flat out refused to support 64 bit until there is 64 bit inline assembly. MS doesnt want to spend the time adding that feature because its not low hanging fruit, and they think it will only serve a niche market, but it really effects a lot more people than just driver writers. The game industry has traditionally used assembly to speed up critical sections of code and engineers very often do the same. Intrinsics just dont cut the mustard for HPC optimizations. MS would rather you just use CopyMemory(), even though it is about 35% SLOWER than an assembly implimentation.
    I agree, there should be inline assembler in the Visual studio compilers - unfortunately, the men in control of that don't agree for some reason.

    When I say "based on", I don't mena "a small part of the kernel", but rather that the majority of the kernel is identical or slightly "improved" version of. The kernel architecture of Win2K is the same architecture as NT4, which is dramatically different from the Win9x kernels.

    For the most part, drivers are NOT written in Assembler. The reason there is fewer 64-bit drivers is simply that most machines don't use 64-bit OS, and thus the demand for 64-bit drivers is small.

    If you do memcopy to a large extent in your driver, you probably do something a bit wrong - but if you can't avoid it, then you can still write a memcopy function that is faster, just use MASM - which IS supported for 64-bit too.

    As to 2K being "more similar to 9X" is probably based on the fact that the 9X look'n'feel was (sort of) moved to 2K, along with Direct3D, which wasn't supported by NT4.

    Last edited by matsp; 12-19-2007 at 06:35 AM. Reason: Misquoting and adding a bit of extra info.
    Compilers can produce warnings - make the compiler programmers happy: Use them!
    Please don't PM me for help - and no, I don't do help over instant messengers.

  3. #18
    The superhaterodyne twomers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    I'm not certain about the time base... any chance of getting the service packs in there too?

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Inside my computer
    You'll also see that the product name for 2000 is NT5 and XP is 5.1.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Problem building Quake source
    By Silvercord in forum Game Programming
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 07-11-2010, 09:13 AM
  2. Apps that act "differently" in XP SP2
    By Stan100 in forum Tech Board
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-16-2004, 10:38 PM
  3. Another Microsoft joke
    By Panopticon in forum A Brief History of
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-02-2003, 12:53 PM
  4. Microsoft rulling
    By Sentaku senshi in forum A Brief History of
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-02-2002, 03:50 AM
  5. Retaliation towards witch king\microsoft
    By Koshare in forum Linux Programming
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-19-2001, 04:54 AM