EnglishVista之家（www.vista123.com）：【Vista之家译】国外IT业者有关Windows 7的一次辩论
虽然Windows 7离发布还远，但国外的一些IT专家们似乎并不这么想，下面就是Randall Kennedy,和Thom Holwerda有关Windows 7的一段辩论。
Thom,
看完你那“反驳性”的文章之后，我发现其实你也赞同我的一些核心观点。
“微软也很清楚，Windows Vista和Windows 7之间并没有多大的区别，虽然Windows 7做了些优化，但并没有本质上的变化”
因此，可以看出我们俩都同意，从Vista到Windows 7并不是一次重大的升级。下面再看看我们俩观点的另一处不同：
“首先，正在运行的内核线程数并不能说明Windows 7对内核是否做了改变..”
对于任何没看过Windows 7源代码的人来说，这样的陈述都是需要相当大的勇气的。事实上，在没有遍览Windows 7的内核资源树状图的情况下，任何人也无法得出这样或那样的结论。这也就是为什么我在过去16年里都一直从事着NT内核相关工作的原因-它已经很优秀了。
对于你的这些观点，我的回复如下：
诚然，我们都无法得出诸如”Windows 7是否对内核作出了改进，作了多少改进“这样的结论，而事实上，我也从未说过这些结论。只是，历史证实了Windows从一个重要版本过渡到另一个重要版本的巨大意义。而根据微软在这个问题上的陈述，我的观点显然更站得住脚：Windows 7跟Vista并没有多大区别，Windows 7只是Vista的 R2版本。而，也许你没有注意到，其实你也是同意我这个观点的。
小编：且不管文中的这些观点孰是孰非，但在我看来，这种热烈讨论的气氛很值得我们借鉴。国内，实在是缺乏这样的氛围。
Thom,
After reviewing your "rebuttal" article, I find that you seem to agree with the core point of my original piece:
"In all seriousness, Microsoft has been very clear that when it comes to under the hood, there won't be many changes between Windows Vista and Windows 7. There will be optimisations to improve performance, but nothing drastic."
So, now that we've established that we both agree that Windows 7 is *not* a major upgrade to Windows Vista (at least as far as "under the hood" is concerned), we can move on to the first major objection in your "rebuttal" text:
"First of all, the number of threads running within a kernel says absolutely nothing whatsoever about how many changes have or have not gone into the kernel..."
(note: emphasis on "whatever" preserved from your article).
Wow! That's a bold statement for someone who (I would assume) does not have access to the Windows 7 source code! The truth is that, without walking the NT kernel source tree, there is simply no way to *conclusively* make such a statement one way or the other. That's why, in my article, I make a point of establishing the history of this metric and how - over the 16 years I've been working with the NT code base - it has proven to be a good, externally-accessible indicator of kernel churn.
So my response is: There is no way that *either* of us can state *conclusively* that the thread count metric does or does not express change at kernel level. But then again, I never claimed that it does - only that history shows the value changing significantly from major version to major version. Combined with various statements made by Microsoft on the subject, this lack of change - when viewed in the context of the aforementioned history for this metric - would seem to support my own conclusion about Windows 7 being so similar to Vista as to warrant a "point release" or "R2" moniker. A conclusion, I might add, that you have already tacitly agreed to (see first quote above).
Vista之家（www.vista123.com），爱上网，爱上Vista123.com
