XPost: alt.comp.os.windows-11
From: nospam@needed.invalid
On Mon, 1/12/2026 4:47 PM, Gremlin wrote:
> Paul news:10jjl3p$22go$1@dont-email.me Tue, 06 Jan
> 2026 18:43:04 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote:
>
>> Vista was fine after SP2 was installed. It was then pretty close
>> to being a Win7 candidate release (same quality level). A few small
>> touches in Vista, were nice -- such as the Search option that when
>> the Search did not find your item, there was a "Try Harder" button :-)
>>
>> Windows is a rolling release, that started from the Vista rewrite.
>
>
> Please elaborate further on this rewrite? I'm unaware of vista being a
rewrite.
It is. It's a rewrite. it took five years to do.
it was released before the testing was finished.
If it takes you five years and you can't even be bothered
to test it properly, something is very very wrong there.
The kernel is substantially different. I do not
know the terminology for this, but we could start
with the Wiki for Vista to see. There is very little
information about kernel details that I know of,
so we can have a substantive discussion.
I know you will argue "I was a beta tester" etc.
But the thing is, it's a matter of degree rather than substance.
I too, worked in the computer industry, and I worked the cradle
to grave of the hardware and software. We wrote two versions
of our OS. I know how much that cost, and how much calendar
that took.
Vista took way way too long. That's the first starting note,
that practically speaking, there cannot be anything left under
the hood that hasn't been fucked with.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_Windows_Vista
"May 2001... and continued until November 8, 2006"
"The same post also described Windows Vista as having approximately
50 million lines of code, with about 2,000 developers working on the
product.
OK, five years and 2000 developers. We wrote an OS in two years with 100
developers.
You can also write OSes with fewer developers than that, such as TempleOS with
one developer.
With such a substantial difference in development path, how can
there be anything left in there ? Sure, they copied the routines
that "must be copied" for guaranteed compatibility. Some of those
same routines, for drawing menus and the like, exist in more
modern versions of Windows and allow Classic Shell and similar
things to be written, by calling into old code that was just sitting there.
The only way we can have a good argument over this, would be
to see details of the kernel progression. And I do not recollect
any good discussions of how that went. Many lies have been told
of technical improvements to the kernel, that just were not true,
so I don't know if anyone has written a history about it or not.
Maybe more of the kernel improvements are visible in Server versions.
I have no interest in Vista. I did not buy a copy. I did not
join the Vista news group. I have tried on three occasions, to
develop a patching method so a poor Vista user could reinstall
and patch up to date. And it took an accidental discovery that
WSUSOffline had figured this out, that I finally got some
traction. And that no longer works today, and Vista as an artifact
is a total writeoff. Sure, you can install it, but you cannot
expect the spinning Windows Update thing will every come back.
If you use the Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer, it cannot
download the WSUSSCN2.cab file and parse it, because the
signing was changed.
********************** Copilot Question *******************
What differences are there, between the WinXP kernel design and the Vista
kernel design ?
Was the Vista kernel designed from scratch with all new code, or was
it merely an evolution of some WinXP code ?
********************** Copilot Answer *******************
**Windows Vista did *not* use a new kernel written from scratch. It was an
evolutionary continuation of the Windows NT lineage, including Windows XP, but
with
major architectural changes - especially in security, driver isolation, memory
management,
and graphics.** The Vista kernel is still NT-based (NT 6.0), while XP is NT
5.1.
Below is a clear breakdown of what changed and what stayed the same, grounded
in what is known from Microsoft’s documentation and technical analyses.
---
# High‑Level Summary
| Aspect | Windows XP Kernel (NT 5.1) | Windows
Vista Kernel (NT 6.0) |
|-----------------------|---------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| **Lineage** | Mature NT 5.x branch | New NT 6.x
branch (evolution, not rewrite) |
| **Security Model** | Limited isolation, weaker defaults | Mandatory
Integrity Control, UAC, ASLR, stronger driver signing |
| **Driver Model** | XPDM (older, less isolated) | WDDM (new
GPU driver model), improved stability |
| **Memory Manager** | Older algorithms, less scalable | Rewritten
memory manager with better NUMA, I/O, caching |
| **Networking Stack** | Legacy TCP/IP stack | Fully
rewritten TCP/IP stack |
| **Graphics** | GDI in kernel mode | GDI moved
out of kernel; GPU scheduling added |
| **Audio Stack** | Kernel mode audio | User mode
audio engine (more stable) |
| **Reliability** | Drivers could easily crash the system | Driver
isolation, service hardening, restartable services |
---
# Was Vista a Rewrite?
### **No - Vista was not a clean-room rewrite.**
It was a **major architectural overhaul built on the existing NT codebase**,
but many subsystems *were* rewritten or heavily redesigned.
Microsoft has repeatedly stated that:
- Vista is **NT 6.0**, not a new kernel.
- It retains NT’s core architecture: object manager, scheduler, executive,
HAL, etc.
- But many subsystems were replaced or deeply modernized.
Think of it as **a new generation of the NT kernel**, not a new kernel.
---
# Major Kernel-Level Differences
## 1. **Security Architecture Overhaul**
Vista introduced the largest security redesign since NT 4.0.
### New in Vista:
- **Mandatory Integrity Control (MIC)**
Processes get integrity levels (Low/Medium/High/System).
Prevents low trust processes from modifying higher trust ones.
- **User Account Control (UAC)**
Admins run as standard users by default.
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
