![]() ![]() MS decided to do the same with NT as Windows-95 because, as we all know, W-95 was a rock solid piece of wonderware that proved kernel-mode drivers were a brilliant idea that should have conferred instant saint-hood on whoever came up with it. "I remember there was quite an uproar about stability when NT4 came out with kernel-mode graphics drivers." This could be one of those cases where such and so feature is supported correctly in some hardware and not others, so the spec might say doing certain things are kosher and they test fine on the hardware you've got, then you find out that there's a lot of people with systems with broken system hardware or drivers. Obviously Apple's driver initiates it, but it doesn't mean that's what's crashing. In any case older versions of windows don't support user mode drivers and not all Windows XP installations have the user mode framework.Īt this point, we don't know where the BSOD coming from yet. If that's the case, Microsoft deserves a pat on the back for providing a framework for user mode drivers and a kick in the pants for making the framework totally incompatible. ![]() So it's possible that it's got direct access because that's the old default and they'd have to rewrite it. "Doesn't need" is not the same as "doesn't use." IIRC, if you want to port a kernel mode driver to the user mode driver framework in Windows, the path of least resistance is to rewrite it from plain old function oriented C to C++ with COM. The filesystem, for example - Minix has a non-threaded filesystem Linux had a threaded filesystem. In fact, that's one of several other ways Minix took performance hits - ways that I'd call bad design. Linux could do everything Minix could, and it already ran in native 32-bit mode (which Minix needed patches for). Or you could spend that same money on a faster computer (a 386), and get Linux for free. And then install the source code, and download a number of patches needed to get something approximating a modern OS, recompile, and reinstall. The best argument at the time was: You could spend the money and buy Minix, and install it. Linus admitted that he never expected Linux to be much more than a stopgap until GNU/HURD was released - except that HURD took too long to get any kind of release out the door, so Linux already had adoption at that point. I think the main reason no one had an interest in Minix was the cost, and the restrictive licensing. It is just a good piece of free software I thought I would share.One of the big reasons no one had any interest in minix is the incredible performance hit the design entails. (If it sounds like I work for the company, I don't. It supposedly works on all IPODs up to and include the iPhone.ĬopyTrans has other programs, which they charge for, but this one is Free.įor anyone looking for a better IPOD manager without all the iTunes baggage, I would recommend taking a look at this program. I was using Anapod explorer, but it does not support my wife's Nano 3G. For some reason it is not as well known as Yamipod, sharepod, ephod, or floola, but I prefer its interface and ease of use. Also, downloading and syncing (actually updating) is very very fast. I like the fact that you can easily add one song without putting it into a library and saving a huge library somewhere. The program is self intuitive and very easy to use. It manages files from the IPOD itself, therefore you do not have to maintain libraries. I just found a new FREE piece of software to manage my IPOD. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |