From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 103376,101730fbd6919745 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-10 00:43:13 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!nntp-relay.ihug.net!ihug.co.nz!out.nntp.be!propagator-SanJose!in.nntp.be!dax.net!juliett.dax.net!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada & .Net (Rotor) References: <4519e058.0204080645.32b63ee1@posting.google.com> From: Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen Message-ID: <7vvgb0ngnk.fsf@vlinux.voxelvision.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 07:42:40 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.216.12.150 X-Complaints-To: abuse@tele2.no X-Trace: juliett.dax.net 1018424560 193.216.12.150 (Wed, 10 Apr 2002 09:42:40 MET DST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 09:42:40 MET DST Organization: Tele2 Norway AS Public Access Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:22301 Date: 2002-04-10T07:42:40+00:00 List-Id: "Juergen Pfeifer" writes: > > > > > To me it seems that most people don't realize that the Win2000 > > > kernel is a huge difference to NT4, not to say the W9x kernel. > > > > Is it? I haven't noticed any huge differences between 2k and NT4. > > There are some noticable cosmetic differences, but (with the exception > > of plug-n-play) the underlying Win32 API and the kernel under that is > > almost identical. > > > > Certianly, there is a huge difference between the NT kernel (used in > > NT, 2k, and XP) and the Win9x series kernels. They are basicly 2 > > *very* different OS's (the former a full-featured modern OS, the > > latter little better than an embedded OS with a GUI) that share a lot > > of the same API's and are somewhat binary-compatable. > > > No, No, No. Then you didn't look close enough. Of course the old > APIs of NT4 mostly stay stable, but under the hood there are a lot > of differences in implementation that makes the huge difference between > Win2K and the NT4 kernel. The whole domain system has been > changed and Active Directory has been introduced. That makes large > Domains much easier to manage. COM+ has been integrated seamlessly, > giving you a world class AppServer functionality including distributed > Transaction monitoring, reliable message queueing and queued components > for free. You have IntelliMirror technology, encrypted filesystem etc. etc. > The networking stack has been improved (giving you IPSec for example) > or a much better DNS, WINS and DHCP implementation than before. > And one could continue this list. Not to mention that the codebase has > been significantly cleaned up. All that results in a much higher stability > of > Win2000 compared to NT4. > > J�rgen But it still is not as stable as Solaris or even Linux judging from the number of reebots after I switched boxes on my desk. :-(