Pasek boczny
Konto
Konto
Szukaj
Szukaj
Ustawienia
Ustawienia
Szukaj

Szukaj w:



Zaawansowane wyszukiwanie
Ustawienia
Przełącz na wersję mobilną
Motyw
Język
Portale internetowe Kissdigital.pl - rozwiązania mobilne Kofeina sklep
Projekt, budowa i promocja - budujemy kompleksowo portale internetowe w oparciu o Drupal. Zaawansowane aplikacje mobilne - bogate portfolio. Dostarczamy czystą kofeinę, z której możesz sam przygotować "energetyka" takiego jak lubisz.




Windows 8.1: Windows 8.1 - Ogólna dyskusja
  • 11 Głosów - 4.82 Średnio
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Subskrybuj ten temat
Snuffy
Użytkownik
Offline

Reputacja: 7

 0     0    
631   10-05-2013   19:11   
Since some builds will never be public, and users will not LEAK then why do they fill the pages with "worthless" info to the public.
It is to make one look BIG and powerful or does that one simply GLOAT or BRAG or FAKE.
gbbsoft
Przyjaciel
Offline

Reputacja: 54

 0     0    
632   11-05-2013   09:27   
W ramach pogaduszek o Win81 proponuje poczytać wypowiedz programisty MS, który jest w dziale rozwijającym Kernel MS.

Żródło:

Goście nie widzą linków. Zarejestruj się na forum klikając tutaj.




Kopiuje, bo takie rzeczy giną ostatnio w sieci:

Cytat:"I Contribute to the Windows Kernel. We Are Slower Than Other Operating Systems. Here Is Why."


I was explaining on Hacker News why Windows fell behind Linux in terms of operating system kernel performance and innovation. And out of nowhere an anonymous Microsoft developer who contributes to the Windows NT kernel wrote a fantastic and honest response acknowledging this problem and explaining its cause. His post has been deleted! Why the censorship? I am reposting it here. This is too insightful to be ignored. [Edit: The anonymous poster himself deleted his post as he thought it was too cruel and did not help make his point, which is about the social dynamics of spontaneous contribution. However he let me know he does not mind the repost at the condition I redact the SHA1 hash info, which I did.]

"""

I'm a developer in Windows and contribute to the NT kernel. (Proof: the SHA1 hash of revision #102 of [Edit: filename redacted] is [Edit: hash redacted].) I'm posting through Tor for obvious reasons.

Windows is indeed slower than other operating systems in many scenarios, and the gap is worsening. The cause of the problem is social. There's almost none of the improvement for its own sake, for the sake of glory, that you see in the Linux world.

Granted, occasionally one sees naive people try to make things better. These people almost always fail. We can and do improve performance for specific scenarios that people with the ability to allocate resources believe impact business goals, but this work is Sisyphean. There's no formal or informal program of systemic performance improvement. We started caring about security because pre-SP3 Windows XP was an existential threat to the business. Our low performance is not an existential threat to the business.

See, component owners are generally openly hostile to outside patches: if you're a dev, accepting an outside patch makes your lead angry (due to the need to maintain this patch and to justify in in shiproom the unplanned design change), makes test angry (because test is on the hook for making sure the change doesn't break anything, and you just made work for them), and PM is angry (due to the schedule implications of code churn). There's just no incentive to accept changes from outside your own team. You can always find a reason to say "no", and you have very little incentive to say "yes".

There's also little incentive to create changes in the first place. On linux-kernel, if you improve the performance of directory traversal by a consistent 5%, you're praised and thanked. Here, if you do that and you're not on the object manager team, then even if you do get your code past the Ob owners and into the tree, your own management doesn't care. Yes, making a massive improvement will get you noticed by senior people and could be a boon for your career, but the improvement has to be very large to attract that kind of attention. Incremental improvements just annoy people and are, at best, neutral for your career. If you're unlucky and you tell your lead about how you improved performance of some other component on the system, he'll just ask you whether you can accelerate your bug glide.

Is it any wonder that people stop trying to do unplanned work after a little while?

Another reason for the quality gap is that that we've been having trouble keeping talented people. Google and other large Seattle-area companies keep poaching our best, most experienced developers, and we hire youths straight from college to replace them. You find SDEs and SDE IIs maintaining hugely import systems. These developers mean well and are usually adequately intelligent, but they don't understand why certain decisions were made, don't have a thorough understanding of the intricate details of how their systems work, and most importantly, don't want to change anything that already works.

These junior developers also have a tendency to make improvements to the system by implementing brand-new features instead of improving old ones. Look at recent Microsoft releases: we don't fix old features, but accrete new ones. New features help much more at review time than improvements to old ones.

(That's literally the explanation for PowerShell. Many of us wanted to improve cmd.exe, but couldn't.)

More examples:
• We can't touch named pipes. Let's add %INTERNAL_NOTIFICATION_SYSTEM%! And let's make it inconsistent with virtually every other named NT primitive.
• We can't expose %INTERNAL_NOTIFICATION_SYSTEM% to the rest of the world because we don't want to fill out paperwork and we're not losing sales because we only have 1990s-era Win32 APIs available publicly.
• We can't touch DCOM. So we create another %C#_REMOTING_FLAVOR_OF_THE_WEEK%!
• XNA. Need I say more?
• Why would anyone need an archive format that supports files larger than 2GB?
• Let's support symbolic links, but make sure that nobody can use them so we don't get blamed for security vulnerabilities (Great! Now we get to look sage and responsible!)
• We can't touch Source Depot, so let's hack together SDX!
• We can't touch SDX, so let's pretend for four releases that we're moving to TFS while not actually changing anything!
• Oh god, the NTFS code is a purple opium-fueled Victorian horror novel that uses global recursive locks and SEH for flow control. Let's write ReFs instead. (And hey, let's start by copying and pasting the NTFS source code and removing half the features! Then let's add checksums, because checksums are cool, right, and now with checksums we're just as good as ZFS? Right? And who needs quotas anyway?)
• We just can't be fucked to implement C11 support, and variadic templates were just too hard to implement in a year. (But ohmygosh we turned "^" into a reference-counted pointer operator. Oh, and what's a reference cycle?)

Look: Microsoft still has some old-fashioned hardcore talented developers who can code circles around brogrammers down in the valley. These people have a keen appreciation of the complexities of operating system development and an eye for good, clean design. The NT kernel is still much better than Linux in some ways --- you guys be trippin' with your overcommit-by-default MM nonsense --- but our good people keep retiring or moving to other large technology companies, and there are few new people achieving the level of technical virtuosity needed to replace the people who leave. We fill headcount with nine-to-five-with-kids types, desperate-to-please H1Bs, and Google rejects. We occasionally get good people anyway, as if by mistake, but not enough. Is it any wonder we're falling behind? The rot has already set in.

"""

Akurat nie dziwię się, że nie chcą grzebać w technologiach (OLE, cmd.exe), na których pół świata się opiera. Bo jak coś zchrzanią, to będzie niezła afera. Lepiej tworzyć nowe technologie metodą copy-paste-delete-add. Zreszta zauważyłem, że to ogólny trend na tym świecie. Ostatnim, który dbał o wsteczną kompatybilność w MS był Bill Gates, po jego odejściu popularne stało się tworzenie nowego-nie-kompatybulnego-ze-starym (pierwszym był VB.Net nie kompatybilne z VB ani VBA).

Ciekawe, czy Balmer to dalej jest wszystko wstanie pociągność. Czarne chmury już nad nim raz wisiały...
papalakaka
Użytkownik
Offline

Reputacja: 2

 0     0    
633   12-05-2013   12:43   
There is someone at [SPAM] who claims to be uploading Windows 8.1 Developer Preview Build 9404.
I somehow don't believe them anymore. I will try and download it, if it is fake, I'll let you know here. I'm writing English, while I understand Polish, but cannot write or speak it, because I speak Russian and Croatian. Hope this doesn't cause any inconveniences...

[Obrazek: 6zr0w7.jpg]
ziome3eknh
Użytkownik
Offline

Reputacja: 0

 0     0    
634   12-05-2013   14:20   
orientuje się ktoś z was jakie są wymagania tego systemu ?
Marynarz
Ekspert
Offline

Reputacja: 443

 0     0    
635   12-05-2013   14:25   
Wymagania systemu Windows 8


Komputer, na którym ma zostać zainstalowany system Windows 8, musi spełniać następujące wymagania:

- Procesor: 1 GHz lub szybszy z obsługą PAE, NX i SSE2
- Pamięć RAM: 1 GB (wersja 32-bitowa) lub 2 GB (wersja 64-bitowa)
- Miejsce na dysku twardym: 16 GB (wersja 32-bitowa) lub 20 GB (wersja 64-bitowa)
- Karta graficzna: Microsoft DirectX 9 ze sterownikiem WDDM

Dodatkowe wymagania związane z określonymi funkcjami:

Aby skorzystać z opcji dotykowych, wymagany jest tablet lub monitor z obsługą wielodotyku (więcej informacji)

Aby przejść do Sklepu Windows oraz pobrać i uruchomić aplikacje, wymagane jest połączenie internetowe oraz ekran o rozdzielczości co najmniej 1024 x 768.

Aby przyciągać aplikacje, wymagany jest ekran o rozdzielczości co najmniej 1366 x 768.

Dostęp do Internetu (mogą się z tym wiązać opłaty pobierane przez usługodawcę internetowego)

Bezpieczny rozruch wymaga oprogramowania układowego, które obsługuje UEFI v2.3.1 Errata B i posiada Certyfikat Microsoft Windows w bazie danych sygnatur interfejsu UEFI.

Niektóre gry i programy mogą wymagać karty graficznej zgodnej z biblioteką DirectX 10 lub nowszą w celu uzyskania optymalnej wydajności.

Konto Microsoft jest wymagane do korzystania z niektórych funkcji.

Do odtwarzania dysków DVD jest potrzebne dodatkowe oprogramowanie (więcej informacji)

Licencja na program Windows Media Center jest sprzedawana osobno (więcej informacji)

Funkcja BitLocker To Go wymaga użycia napędu flash USB (tylko Windows 8 Pro)

Funkcja BitLocker wymaga użycia modułu Trusted Platform Module (TPM) 1.2 lub napędu flash USB (tylko Windows 8 Pro)

Funkcja Client Hyper-V wymaga systemu 64-bitowego z obsługą translacji adresów drugiego poziomu (SLAT) i dodatkowo 2 GB pamięci RAM (tylko Windows 8 Pro)

Do oglądania i nagrywania programów telewizyjnych w programie Windows Media Center potrzebny jest telewizor (tylko dodatki Windows 8 Pro Pack i Windows 8 Media Center Pack)

Oferta bezpłatnej telewizji internetowej różni się w zależności od regionu świata, a niektóre usługi mogą wiązać się z dodatkowymi opłatami (Windows 8 Pro Pack i Windows 8 Media Center Pack)
Merode
Użytkownik
Offline

Reputacja: 4

 0     0    
636   12-05-2013   15:26   
(12-05-2013 12:43)papalakaka napisał(a):

Goście nie widzą linków. Zarejestruj się na forum klikając tutaj.


There is someone at [SPAM] who claims to be uploading Windows 8.1 Developer Preview Build 9404.
I somehow don't believe them anymore. I will try and download it, if it is fake, I'll let you know here. I'm writing English, while I understand Polish, but cannot write or speak it, because I speak Russian and Croatian. Hope this doesn't cause any inconveniences...

It's alright, just let us know.. 2
Stashek
Użytkownik
Offline

Reputacja: 0

 0     0    
637   12-05-2013   16:20   
Sooo whats up guys?any ideas about 9404-fake or not?Im just checked everywhere and nobody heard about a new build.Shame on me but I write polish very bad
papalakaka
Użytkownik
Offline

Reputacja: 2

 0     0    
638   12-05-2013   19:30   
(12-05-2013 16:20)Stashek napisał(a):

Goście nie widzą linków. Zarejestruj się na forum klikając tutaj.


Sooo whats up guys?any ideas about 9404-fake or not?Im just checked everywhere and nobody heard about a new build.Shame on me but I write polish very bad

They say it's fake. One of the members has downloaded it and claims it is 9369.
If you want to test it for yourself, here is the link. I have a slow connection but will try it by myself, just to make sure.

Goście nie widzą linków. Zarejestruj się na forum klikając tutaj.




edit: In chat the uploader of the faked build said that he mistakenly uploaded the wrong build. Hard to believe.
Snuffy
Użytkownik
Offline

Reputacja: 7

 0     0    
639   12-05-2013   21:11   
When it takes as long to upload as his did... a mistake is hard to believe... my ISP is slower and believe me I make DAMN sure what I upload is correct... shame shame on fake ... but yes the 9404 is FAKE guaranteed FAKE
Pumpiron579
Użytkownik
Offline

Reputacja: 0

 0     0    
640   13-05-2013   05:31   
Snuffy napisał(a):When it takes as long to upload as his did... a mistake is hard to believe... my ISP is slower and believe me I make DAMN sure what I upload is correct... shame shame on fake ... but yes the 9404 is FAKE guaranteed FAKE
I Downloaded it and burned the disk but all the dates in all the files was from March 25th. The size would also make it x64. I didn't install it

It is 9369 x64 I downloaded it and burned the disk, opened the files and they all say March 25th.
   




Zaloguj się lub zarejestruj, aby odpowiedzieć w temacie.
Dołącz do naszej społeczności!


Zarejestruj się
Posiadasz konto? Kliknij poniżej.


Zaloguj się


Użytkownicy przeglądający ten temat: 1 gości

Centrum napraw komputerów Warszawa ▪ Apartamenty w Kościelisku ▪ Szkolenia dla farmaceutów ▪ Youboost Łukasz Wudyka

Portal  Kontakt  Pomoc  Facebook 
© CentrumWindows
Tłumaczenie © 2007-2014 Polski support MyBB
Skrypt forum MyBB, © 2002-2016 MyBB Group
Biznes-Host