Yes it does. The GUI in windows runs partially in kernel mode (the GDI in older versions, not sure how it's called nowadays), which means bugs in the GUI can kill the kernel (BSOD).pheonixstorm wrote:Thats not entirely true though. There may be vast improvements to both the gui and the kernel but that doesn't explain the BSOD that is not related to the gui improvements or in the case of Vista/7 the BROD (Blue Ribbon of Death).
Maybe not visible, but under the hood, there were lots of new GDI features, new controls, everything. There were major GUI changes, even if the overall look didn't change that much, the machinery behind it did, and it shows on the applications that run on them. Remember, 98 had a decent media player, 95 didn't. That's due to big changes in the underlying GDI.pheonixstorm wrote:95/98/ME didn't have drastic gui changes either, but 95 and ME were both buggy as hell.
That's quite wrong. The leanness of win 7 over vista is due to optimization of the GUI elements, not the kernel.pheonixstorm wrote:The Vista gui and win 7 gui are nearly the same (with some enhancements in 7) but with such a drastic change in the OS the kernel got a lot of updates as well.
It made it into 8.pheonixstorm wrote:The filesystem was supposed to get an update too but the project was never completed before Vista shipped and may have been scrapped since it never made it into 7.
What with ntfs?pheonixstorm wrote:Same ol ntfs. At least its not fat16 or fat32. Now that at least was a huge step in the right direction. MS made the right design decision though when they went with the nt kernel over the retail win32 kernel. Though they should start trading up and going the route Apple did and craft win 9 out of a unix core (even if it is only proprietary).
ME's problem was that it was a rebranding of an older OS, it was a mistake on many levels and I don't even count it.Gugnir wrote:ME and Vista's problems were not in the GUI...
Vista's problems were in fact in the GUI. Its resource hunger was because the GUI was far sub-optimally implemented, and the fact that it treated the user as a complete idiot was a GUI design error. All the problems caused by the UAC were user interface problems too, abusing of it and making the user insensitive to UAC warnings. Kernel-wise, the UAC worked fine.