Windows 7: Release Candidate 1 Preview
by Ryan Smith and Gary Key on May 5, 2009 11:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Systems
Getting Dirty: What’s Changing Under the Hood
While Windows 7 is a refinement of Vista, this doesn’t preclude making some changes in the kernel and other related systems. Microsoft has opted to spend most of their efforts working on various graphics systems, so among the big changes there’s only a few items of note that don’t fall into the graphics category.
Likely the change with the most immediate impact is that Microsoft has reworked the subsystem responsible for TV tuners, the Broadcast Driver Architecture (BDA). The latest incarnation of BDA adds a full DRM chain, giving rise to the Protected Broadcast Driver Architecture (PBDA). PBDA solves the biggest issue Microsoft has had getting Windows computers accepted as TV viewers: the lack of a simple and effective DRM chain between the tuner and the computer. HDCP ensures that content is protected between the computer and the display, but there has been no standardized way to do the same with incoming content. As such the only services that allow Windows connectivity with protected content thus far have been cable systems using CableCARDs, all the while limiting this functionality to computers specially licensed by CableLabs.
PBDA protected data flow. Slide courtesy Microsoft
PBDA also resolves some lesser technical issues with BDA, such as how a device should communicate with Windows Media Center when it needs setup information that Windows Media Center can’t provide, and how to feed guide data to Windows Media Center (currently it pulls the data from Zap2It). Although this is open to all services, Microsoft’s primary example here is DirecTV, which would require all of these additions. DirecTV has been developing the HDPC-20 tuner for PCs but held it back for unnamed reasons. All indications are that the HDPC-20 will finally be a go due to PBDA (and the addition of H.264 decoding support helps, too).
The downside from all of this however is obvious: more DRM. We’re not fans of DRM, so we’re not enthused to see that yet more DRM is required before content distributors are willing to let Windows computers access their content. It’s very much making a deal with the Devil.
Next up, the Windows kernel has also seen some tweaking in preparation for ever-larger core counts on CPUs. Vista was tuned for up to 32 cores, but the dispatcher lock made scaling beyond that difficult as it causes threads to spend too much time waiting on the lock. The lock has been redesigned to better support more cores, pushing the new cap up to 256 cores. Bear in mind that currently a single Intel Nehalem quad-core processor effectively has eight cores due to Hyper-Threading, so it was possible to hit the 32 core limit on a 4P Nehalem system, directly creating a problem once Intel puts more cores into Nehalem’s successor. With the limit raised to 256 cores, Windows 7 should be well ahead of the CPUs again.
SSD users will be happy to know that Windows 7 has improved support for those devices. Although Windows 7 doesn’t have an SSD-optimized file system as first rumored, it is adding TRIM support. For more details on TRIM, please see our SSD Anthology article
Wrapping up the changes, Microsoft has also added native support for Wireless Wide Area Networks (WWAN), more commonly referred to as mobile broadband networks. Adapters for such networks were already usable on existing Vista and XP installations, but this brings the configuration of those devices into the OS rather than using 3rd party utilities, similar to how Windows took over WiFi management previously.
Further optimizations have also been made under the hood to help contain Windows’ resource usage and speed up its boot time. Microsoft hasn’t documented every single change they’ve made to make Windows less resource hungry, but there’s clearly a cumulative effort beyond just squeezing more out of the DWM and gadgets (more on this later). Meanwhile everything that makes Windows less resource hungry feeds into shaving seconds off how long it takes to boot Windows, which along with other changes is designed to help get Windows to consistently boot in under 30 seconds. Changes here include additional parallelism in driver initialization and chopping down the number of services that load with the system before they’re ever called. SuperFetch has also been slightly tweaked to improve the post-boot experience – it no longer starts caching things immediately after the user account loads, so that using a freshly booted computer isn’t quite so sluggish. In effect SuperFetch has been deprioritized some so that its loading is less noticeable to the user.
Vista SP1 Boot Times, Courtesy Microsoft
121 Comments
View All Comments
Ryan Smith - Thursday, May 7, 2009 - link
Actually, it has both of those features, although as the article was running long and I didn't consider them important I didn't mention them. It can defrag drives simultaneously. Scheduling has been in there since at least Vista.strikeback03 - Thursday, May 7, 2009 - link
I was able to schedule weekly defrags back in Win2000 on my old laptopleexgx - Wednesday, May 6, 2009 - link
it can if you use command line on win7 (emm i think it does loet you defrag more then one disk at the same time in the GUI, got no power for laptop so cant find out yet)Pirks - Wednesday, May 6, 2009 - link
http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/00001675.h...">http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/00001675.h...leexgx - Wednesday, May 6, 2009 - link
Hide extensions for known file types, yes every PC i am on i untick that option, its So unsafe its unrealwith windows 7 extensions should Not be hidden be it any verson of windows with vista pressing F2 or rename only selects the name now not all of the file name like XP and lower does so harder to lose the extension
Pirks - Wednesday, May 6, 2009 - link
Yeah, I agree that extensions should NOT be hidden BY DEFAULT. Unfortunately they are hidden. So, Win 7 is still a virus heaven _by default_!JarredWalton - Wednesday, May 6, 2009 - link
Hiding extensions doesn't make it a "virus heaven"; it just makes it possible for Trojan horses to trick stupid users a bit easier. How does that malware.txt.exe file get to the PC in the first place? By some user being stupid. If extensions are hidden, then why is that file called "malware.txt" rather than just "malware"? Oh yes: because it's trying to trick you by not doing the same thing as every other icon, so it's already a red flag (which admittedly most computer users are not smart enough to notice).For technical people, the extensions mean something - I know I always show them - but for most computer users the fact that an icon says "EXE", "SCR", "COM", "CMD", or anything else as the extension means very little. If you don't *know* what an icon is, you shouldn't click it. Simple! But sadly most computer users are not smart enough to know that.
B3an - Friday, May 8, 2009 - link
That comment was posted by Pirks. Possibly the biggest apple fanboy ever. I'm not sure i've seen a comment of his on DailyTech that hasn't been rated down. Dont feed the troll.leexgx - Wednesday, May 6, 2009 - link
network tests need to be done not the same as XPplease open winamp, WMP or teamspeak play something and then do the gigabit network test thay must of fixed the 10MB/s cap problem on Win7 when playing sound (have to mess with vista reg to remove the MMS limiter), none raid to none raid pcs shouuld be doing harddisk speeds acroess the network {70-90mb/s ish,}raid to raid or SSD should be 120MB/s about on the network
Ryan Smith - Thursday, May 7, 2009 - link
It's a time issue; we didn't have a chance to work that it. It has been noted, and I'll make sure that gets in the next W7 article.