comp/net virus protection - Page 7

xoxoxoBruce · 02-08-2009, 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbpark

TW,
Unfortunately, Windows is a complex beast. I'd need a whole series of posts to explain what I've picked up over the past 11+ years of working with Windows NT and its successor OSes.

Series of posts?

More like you'd have to write an encyclopedia to explain what you know about this stuff.

I'm certain tw knows a lot about this stuff too, but he's grouchy.

classicman · 02-08-2009, 02:56 AM

What good is having knowledge if. . .

oh nevermind.

mbpark · 02-08-2009, 07:04 AM

TW,

It is that reason why Mark Russinovich's company (Sysinternals) was bought by Microsoft. He was brought in to clean it up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tw

Spaghetti code. What happens when a project does not have a strong architect with a clearly defined architecture. Windows has prospered by trying to do everything. Windows has suffered for the same reason.

tw · 02-08-2009, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbpark

It is that reason why Mark Russinovich's company (Sysinternals) was bought by Microsoft. He was brought in to clean it up.

I always considered the purchase of System Internals to be what Bill and Dave did to grow Hewlett and Packard and what John Chambers did for Cisco. They bought innovative technology from companies not yet surrounded by large structures - to fill gaps in their company product line.

Microsoft basically had no useful analysis tools for Windows. System Internals are informative tools.

That spaghetti code is a symptom of poor planning at the architect's level. Is probably why the head of Windows was removed because of Vista's development. Are Russinovich and Cogwell working as architects for Microsoft Windows?

Shawnee123 · 02-08-2009, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Well, excuuuuuse me.:p
I'm not dissing your ability or sincerity to the fix, just reminding him to remember he's talking to (other than you) novices.

I know. I appreciated that as well. I just wanted to point out that I do need to learn...or be a slave to others forever. I wouldn't make a good slave. I'm too mouthy.

xoxoxoBruce · 02-08-2009, 04:08 PM

Yeah, but you'd look great in a Princess Leia slave outfit.

Shawnee123 · 02-08-2009, 04:09 PM

You have no idea.

mbpark · 02-08-2009, 04:32 PM

TW,

Mark Russinovich is one of the lead Windows architects now. He was one of the forces behind MinWin, which was the refactoring of the Windows code to remove dependencies and make it easier to build and maintain the product.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tw

I always considered the purchase of System Internals to be what Bill and Dave did to grow Hewlett and Packard and what John Chambers did for Cisco. They bought innovative technology from companies not yet surrounded by large structures - to fill gaps in their company product line.

Microsoft basically had no useful analysis tools for Windows. System Internals are informative tools.

That spaghetti code is a symptom of poor planning at the architect's level. Is probably why the head of Windows was removed because of Vista's development. Are Russinovich and Cogwell working as architects for Microsoft Windows?

tw · 02-08-2009, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbpark

Mark Russinovich ... was one of the forces behind MinWin, which was the refactoring of the Windows code to remove dependencies and make it easier to build and maintain the product.

Never heard of MinWin. What is it for? What dependencies are being removed?

mbpark · 02-08-2009, 07:04 PM

TW,

MinWin, as I stated, is the re-architecture of Windows itself to remove circular dependencies and build issues. It's a complete refactoring of the base of the system itself and the components to make it easier to build, maintain, and debug. Windows, before Windows 7, was devilishly complex to debug and fix issues with. Mark Russinovich did something nearly impossible, which was to help resolve that.

dar512 · 02-08-2009, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

You have no idea.

We would if you'd put on the costume and take the picture.

02-08-2009, 11:56 PM

I came across an item on the MSN home page for Sunday, 08 FEB 09 that reminded me of this thread. It was a link titled Ranked: Security software which led to an article by PC World on evaluations of security suites (pay for packages).

Though a bit off topic, I found the ranking of security suites in that article versus the ranking of components in this thread to be interesting; so, I linked it here FYI.

tw · 02-09-2009, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbpark

MinWin, as I stated, is the re-architecture of Windows itself to remove circular dependencies and build issues. It's a complete refactoring of the base of the system itself and the components to make it easier to build, maintain, and debug.

So MinWin was a redesign of the entire kernel to create Windows 7. Did not address peripheral programs such as Paint, Notepad, and Defrag. Minwin was not another and new Windows product.

How many architects does Microsoft use on Windows? And what happened to Bruce Cogwell?

Shawnee123 · 02-09-2009, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dar512

We would if you'd put on the costume and take the picture.

Uh, dude, I just looked that costume up online and uh, yeah...no. :p

mbpark · 02-10-2009, 08:14 AM

TW,

Somehow I think re-architecting the core of the product is more important than addressing Paint, Notepad, Solitaire (which got a redesign for Vista anyway), or Defrag (which Microsoft does not own, and is licensed from the Diskeeper corporation)

.

Microsoft doesn't publish how many architects they use on Windows. They just publish the ones that are the most famous, such as Mark Russinovich, David Cutler, and Bryce Cogswell (who is still at MS from what I understand).

Quote:

Originally Posted by tw

So MinWin was a redesign of the entire kernel to create Windows 7. Did not address peripheral programs such as Paint, Notepad, and Defrag. Minwin was not another and new Windows product.

How many architects does Microsoft use on Windows? And what happened to Bruce Cogwell?

02-08-2009, 02:56 AM	#92
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	What good is having knowledge if. . . oh nevermind. __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

02-08-2009, 04:08 PM	#96
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	Yeah, but you'd look great in a Princess Leia slave outfit. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

02-08-2009, 04:09 PM	#97
Shawnee123 Why, you're a regular Alfred E Einstein, ain't ya? Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 21,206	You have no idea. __________________ A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones who need the advice. --Bill Cosby

02-08-2009, 11:56 PM	#102
NoBoxes Guest Posts: n/a	And now for something completely different ... I came across an item on the MSN home page for Sunday, 08 FEB 09 that reminded me of this thread. It was a link titled Ranked: Security software which led to an article by PC World on evaluations of security suites (pay for packages). Though a bit off topic, I found the ranking of security suites in that article versus the ranking of components in this thread to be interesting; so, I linked it here FYI.

02-08-2009, 07:04 PM	#100
mbpark Lecturer Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Carmel, Indiana Posts: 761	TW, MinWin, as I stated, is the re-architecture of Windows itself to remove circular dependencies and build issues. It's a complete refactoring of the base of the system itself and the components to make it easier to build, maintain, and debug. Windows, before Windows 7, was devilishly complex to debug and fix issues with. Mark Russinovich did something nearly impossible, which was to help resolve that.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)